THE EFFECTS OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES TRAINING ON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ENGLISH LANGUAGE PERFORMANCE

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge and express my gratitude to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vo Dai Quang for his insightful comments and contructive supervision throughout my research. I especially wish to thank Ms. Nguyen Thai Ha for her valuable guidance, encouragement in the very first step of my thesis. I also wish to thank all the staff members of the Department of Post graduate, Hanoi University for providing me best conditions to fulfill my thesis. I would like to acknowledge and express my appreciation to the administrators of Long My high school for their constant support and concern while the work was in progress. My special thanks are also sent to my colleagues at Long My high school who have helped me with data collection for this study. Finally, I am deeply indebted to all the support and encouragement that my family has offerred me.

HANOI UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

THESIS

THE EFFECTS

OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES TRAINING

ON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ENGLISH

LANGUAGE PERFORMANCE

HANOI - 2009

HANOI UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

THESIS

THE EFFECTS

OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES TRAINING

ON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ENGLISH

LANGUAGE PERFORMANCE

SUPERVISOR: ASSOC PROF DR VO DAI QUANG

HANOI - 2009

I would like to acknowledge and express my gratitude to my supervisor Assoc.Prof Dr Vo Dai Quang for his insightful comments and contructive

supervision throughout my research

I especially wish to thank Ms Nguyen Thai Ha for her valuable guidance,encouragement in the very first step of my thesis

I also wish to thank all the staff members of the Department of Post graduate,Hanoi University for providing me best conditions to fulfill my thesis

I would like to acknowledge and express my appreciation to the administrators

of Long My high school for their constant support and concern while the workwas in progress

My special thanks are also sent to my colleagues at Long My high school whohave helped me with data collection for this study

Finally, I am deeply indebted to all the support and encouragement that myfamily has offerred me

Before the experiment, the MAI questionnaire was exploited to measurestudents’ metacognitive awareness which was utilized as the base for dividingstudents into groups.

Then, the experiment was carried out in 10 weeks During the experiment, theexperimental group were trained with 10 metacognitive strategies organized by

Oxford (1990) The ten strategies chosen for training are ‘overviewing and

linking with already known material’, ‘paying attention’, ‘finding out about language learning’, ‘organizing’, ‘setting goals and objectives’, ‘identifying the purpose of a language task’, planning for a language task’, ‘seeking practice opportunities’, ‘self monitoring’, ‘self-evaluating’ The instruction was

explicit and the training course was seperated from the main course of highschool educational system

The data collected from the MAI questionnaire, the invetory of metacognitiveuse and the tests in pre- and post-stage were computed and analyzed usingpaired-sample t-test, SPSS version 16.0.1

The major findings of the study showed that explicit metacognitive strategiestraining helped students improve their autonomy in language learning as well

as their language performance It was concluded from the findings thatmetacognitve strategies were useful to high school students and the use ofmetacognitive strategies helped students improve their language performance

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS 3

ABSTRACT 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS 5

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 7

LIST OF TABLES 8

LIST OF FIGURES 9

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 10

1.1 Background to the study 10

1.2 Aims and Objectives of the study 12

1.2.1 Aims 12

1.2.2 Objectives 12

1.3 Scope of the study 12

1.4 Significance of the study 13

1.5 Organization of the thesis 13

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 15

2.1 Language learning strategies 15

2.1.1 Definition 15

2.1.2 Classification 16

2.1.3 Metacognitive strategies 18

2.2 Language learning strategy instruction 21

2.2.1 The role of language learning strategies instruction 21

2.2.2 Studies related to metacognitive strategies instruction 21

2.2.3 Types of language learning strategy instruction 24

2.2.4 Models for language learning strategy instruction 25

2.2.5 Language issue in language learning strategy instruction 26

2.2.6 The role of teachers in language learning strategy instruction 27

2.3 Summary 27

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 29

3.1 Research questions and description of variables 29

3.1.2 Description of variables 29

3.2 Data collection instruments 30

3.2.1 Questionnaires 30

3.2.2 Tests 33

3.3 Subjects of the study 36

 Description 36

 Group assignment 37

3.4 Metacognitive strategy instruction 38

3.4.1 Ways of providing strategy instruction 38

3.4.2 Language of instruction 38

3.4.3 Model for language learning strategy instruction 39

3.4.4 The materials used in the experiment 40

3.4.5 The instructor 40

3.5 Data collection procedures 40

3.6 Data analysis 42

3.6.1 Questionnaire data analysis 42

3.6.2 Test data analysis 42

3.7 Coding scheme for the use of metacognitive strategies 42

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 44

4.1 The results and discussion of the questionnaires 44

4.1.1 The results of the MAI questionnaire 44

4.1.2 The results of the inventory of metacognitve use 49

4.1.3 Discussion of the results of the questionnaires 51

4.2 The results and discussion of the tests 52

4.2.1 The test results within groups 53

4.2.2 The test results between groups 56

4.2.3 Discussion of the test results 58

CHAPTER 5: IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 60

5.1 Implications 60

5.2 Limitations of the study and recommendations for further research 61

5.2.1 Limitations of the study 61

5.2.2 Recommendations for further research 62

5.3 Conclusions 62

REFERENCES 64

APPENDICES 71

APPENDIX 1: Oxford’s Strategy Classification System (Source: Oxford, 1990) 71

APPENDIX 2: CODING SCHEME FOR THE USE OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES 73

APPENDIX 3 THE MAI QUESTIONNAIRE (Vietnamese version) 75

APPENDIX 4 THE MAI QUESTIONNAIRE (English version) 79

APPENDIX 5 THE PRETEST 83

APPENDIX 6 THE INVENTORY OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES USE (PRE-STAGE) 88

APPENDIX 7 THE POST-TEST 90

APPENDIX 8 THE INVENTORY OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES USE (POST-STAGE) 95

APPENDIX 9 THE THE TEST RESULTS 97

APPENDIX 10 THE RESULTS OF THE MAI QUESTIONNAIRES 98

APPENDIX 11 THE RESULTS OF THE INVENTORY OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES USE 100

APPENDIX 12 TABLES 102

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CALLA: Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach

CG: Control Group

EG: Experimental Group

ESL: English as a second language

IMU: Inventory of Metacognitive Use

LLS: Language learning strategy

LLSI: Language learning strategy instruction

LLSs: Language learning strategies

L1: First language

L2: Second language

M: Mean

MAI: Metacognitive Awareness Inventory

MOET: Ministry of Education and Training

P: Probability value

SD: Standard Deviation

SILL: Strategy Inventory for Language Learning

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 The correlation of the control group and the experimental group

Table 4.2 The metacognitive awareness of the control group in the pre- and

post-stages

Table 4.3 The differences in metacognitive awareness between pre-stage and

post-stage of the control group

Table 4.4 The metacognitive awareness of the experimental group in the

pre-and post-stages

Table 4.5 The differences in metacognitive awareness between pre-stage and

post-stage of the experimental group

Table 4.6 The total results of the MAI questionnaire between CG and EG Table 4.7 The differences in the resutls of the MAI questionnaire between CG

Table 4.10 The results of the inventory of metacognitve use of the CG

Table 4.11 The differences in the results of the inventory of metacognitve use

between the pre-stage and post-stage of the CG

Table 4.12 The results of the inventory of metacognitve use of the EG

Table 4.13 The differences in the results of the inventory of metacognitve use

between the pre-stage and post-stage of the EG

Table 4.14 The results of the inventory of metacognitive use of CG and EG Table 4.15 The differences in the results of the inventory of metacognitve use

between the pre-stage and post-stage of the EG

Table 4.16 The test results of the control group

Table 4.17 The differences in the test results between the pre-stage and

post-stage of the control group

Table 4.18 The test results of the experimental group

Table 4.19 The differences in the test results between the pre-stage and

post-stage of the experimental group

Table 4.20 The test results of the CG and the EG

Table 4.21 The differences in the test results between CG and EG

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 The results of the MAI questionnaire of the control group

Figure 4.2 The results of the MAI questionnaire of the experimental group Figure 4.3 The results of the MAI questionnaire between CG and EG

Figure 4.4 The section results of the MAI questonnaire between CG and EG Figure 4.5.The results of the inventory of metacognitve use of the CG

Figure 4.6 The results of the inventory of metacognitve use of the EG

Figure 4.7 The total results of the IMU questionnaire bettween CG and EG Figure 4.8 The results of the inventory of metacognitve use

Figure 4.9 The test results of the control group

Figure 4.10 The test results of the experimental group.

Figure 4.11 The overall test results between CG and EG

Figure 4.12 The section test resuls between CG and EG

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

Since many years ago, with the integration and globalization policy of thegovernment in order to keep up with the rapid development of the world,English subject has been considered very important in the field of education.Recently, English subject has become compulsory for high school students Ithas also been an obligatory subject in the final exam, along with Mathematicsand Literature

In the acknowledgement of the importance of this subject, specialists inlanguage teaching have paid much attention to discovering and applying newmethods for teaching English as a foreign language with the hope of helpinglearners acquire and learn English more effectively However, the unexpectedresults, which were reported by the MOET in English subject in the final exams

in the past few years, are of the visible evidences for the failure of high schoolstudents in acquiring English as a second language The causes may derivefrom many factors Rubin (1975) argues that many language teachers are soconcerned with finding the best method or with getting the correct answer thatthey fail to pay attention to the learning process (Rubin, 1975) Vietnameseteachers may be in such a situation Dansereau (1978) also recognizes that theover-emphasis on teaching methods may convey serious limitations such asinadvertent reinforcement of ineffective and non-transferable learner strategies

Some additional problems can be found from the students’ part Firstly,Vietnamese students seem to train and to be trained so many skills for theirlanguage performance but the skill to self-direct themselves in languagelearning is not paid much attention to They may have very little of the ability

of planning, arranging, focusing, and evaluating their own learning The viewthat Vietnamese students tend to be passive, obedient and quiet is also accepted

by most of high school teachers Secondly, a large number of high school

subject Most high school students show their understanding of the currentlytaught lessons through post activities, which are carried out to measure howwell the students understand the lesson However, they usually fail with theprogress tests taken a few weeks later We incline to the fact that they studywith little or without plan.

Besides, the load of the curriculum is one of the remarkable factors It iscomplained by both teachers and students that the class time is not sufficientfor the teachers to carry out any activities relevant to the lessons What happen

in the classroom just stick to the compulsory contents in the textbooks.Students are given no chance or very little chance learning how to control theirlearning, how to manage the time to study, how to self-direct themselves tobecome better learners and so on

The findings have urged the researcher to seek for the solutions and then shehas found that many of previous studies have shown the relationship betweenmetacognitive strategies and learners’ autonomy as well as language learningacquisition (see, for example, Cao (2007), Gimeno (2002), Kato (2005),Kincannon (1999), Maraco (2001), O’Malley (1987))

Research in metacognition suggested that making students aware of thesestrategies may be useful, that students can develop strategies on their own, andthat their use increases learning and performance (Blakey, 1990)

It is also stated in Wenden (1987) that one of the “leading” educational goals ofthe research on learner strategies is an autonomous language learner Thestrategy training activities can help learners become not only more efficient atlearning and using their second language but also more capable of self-directing their endeavors (ibid: 8) Guided practice in managing their ownexperience allows students to develop the metacognitive strategies needed tocontinue to direct their own learning (Metcalfe and Shimamura, 1994)

Graham (1997) confirmed that metacognitive strategies, which allow students

improvement of learning Anderson (2002b) supported to our beliefs with theidea that developing metacognitive awareness may also lead to thedevelopment of stronger cognitive skills.

The facts stated show that there is a necessity of improving students’ autonomy

in language learning so that they can control their learning themselves, whichcan help them acquire language better Metacognitive strategies training will berecommended in this situation with the belief that teaching learners strategiesexplicitly at the very first stage of the language lessons will give students agood direction on their future learning It is also believed that training studentsthese skills is a need to help them get better results and manage well with such

a difficult subject like English

1.2 Aims and Objectives of the study

1.2.1 Aims

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of metacognitive strategiestraining on high school students’ language performance

1.2.2 Objectives

The objectives of this study are stated as follows

The first objective is to explore the differences in the degree of metacognitive

awareness as well as metacognitive use before and after the experiment

The second objective is to examine students’ progess in English languageacquisition via the application of metacognitive strategies

1.3 Scope of the study

This study focuses only on metacognitive strategies for high school students asindicated in the tittle of the thesis because there is a limitation of time andconditions The subjects of this study are students of grade 11 Besides, theoutcomes of high school students are mostly evaluated by the written tests

Therefore, written tests which focus mainly on the subskills such aspronunciation, vocabulary, reading, grammar, and short writing will be themajor means to measure the hypothesis coming from the present study.

1.4 Significance of the study

In this study, both teachers and students have taken advantages from thestrategies training On the students’ part, learning strategy instruction hashelped learners in three ways Firstly, learning strategies instruction helpsstudents to become better English learners Secondly, skills in using learningstrategies assist them in becoming independent and confident learners Finally,they become more motivated as they begin to understand the relationshipbetween their use of strategies and success in learning languages (see more inchapter 4) On the teacher’s part, the researcher herself finds that when usingstrategy training often, she becomes enthusiastic about her roles as thefacilitator of classroom learning Strategy training also makes the teacher morelearner-oriented and more aware of her students’ needs During the training, theteacher, additionally, begins to scrutinize how the teaching techniques relate orfail to relate to the students’ learning strategies and sometimes the teacherchooses to alter the instructional patterns because of such ‘scrutiny’ (Oxford etal., 1999, p.210)

1.5 Organization of the thesis

This thesis is organized in five chapters described as follows

Chapter 1, ‘Introduction’, deals with the background, aims and objectives,

scope, significance and the outline of this study

Chapter 2, ‘Literature Review’, provides readers with the definitions of the

term ‘language learning strategies’ The information about language learningstrategy instruction is also collected in this part, including presentation in theroles of LLSI in language learning, studies related to metacognitive instruction,

teachers in LLSI as well A short summary about how the researcher appliesthe literature for the study is also mentioned at the end of this part.

Chapter 3 presents the methodology for this study and the procedure for

carrying out the reasearch

Chapter 4 exposes the results through data analysis The results of the data

analysis were, then, discussed and compared with those obtained in previousstudies

Chapter 5 provides the implications, limitations, and reccomendations for

further research The next important section in this chapter is the conclusions tothe whole study And the last one is the references

The appendices of this thesis consists of Oxford’s Strategy ClassificationSystem, the coding scheme for the use of Metacognitive Strategies, theQuestionaire (English and Vietnamese version), results of the questionaires andthe tests, and the pre-test and posttest

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Language learning strategies

This section will provide readers with the definitions, the classification fromdifferent viewpoints on language learning strategies, and the information aboutmetacognition

2.1.1 Definition

People have been writing about and conducting research into learner strategiesfor about 20 years now However, what learner strategies actually are has beendifficult to define at an international level with full consensus (Macaro, 2001).There have been several definitions of language learning strategies developeduntil now

Weinstein and Mayer (1986) stated that learning strategies are ‘the behaviourand thought’ that a learner engages in during learning that are intended toinfluence the learner's encoding process

Lately, Charnot (1987) supported one more definition when consideringlanguage-learning strategies as techniques, approaches or deliberate actionsthat students take in order to facilitate the learning and recall of both linguisticand content area information

Wenden (1987) argued that learner strategies refer to ‘language learningbehaviour learners actually engage in to learn and regulate the learning of asecond language’, ‘what they know about the strategies they use’, ‘what theyknow about the aspects of their language learning other than the strategies theyuse’

Oxford (1990) defined language-learning strategies as ‘specific actions taken

by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more

self-In 1998, Cohen offered another definition as second language learningstrategies ‘encompass’ both second language learning and second language usestrategies When taken together they constitute the steps or actions consciouslyselected by learners either for the learning of a second language, the use of it,

or both (Cohen, 1998)

Although there have been a variety of definitions stated and after Cohen’s(1998), some more definitions on language learning strategies have beendeveloped The definition of Oxford (1990) will be exploited as the base for thepresent study, for her definition is clear, concrete and its categories are suitableand applicable to high school students

2.1.2 Classification

The concentration of work on language learning strategies has been not onlywith defining strategies but also with classifying them The classification oflanguage learning strategies is varied by many scholars such as O'Malley et al(1985), Wenden (1987), Oxford (1992), Stern (1992), and Ellis (1994)

What follow is the summarization of the language learning strategiesclassifications of some authors who shared more or less the samecategorizations of the language learning strategies without any radical changes

As a pioneer, Rubbin (1987) classified language-learning strategies into threetypes: learning strategies, communicative strategies and social strategies

Learning strategies are defined as strategies contributing directly to thedevelopment of the language system constructed by the learner This kind ofstrategies consists of two subcategories: cognitive learning strategies andmetacognitive strategies in which cognitive learning strategies refer to ‘thesteps or operations used in learning or problem –solving that require directanalysis, transformation, or synthesis of learning materials’ whilemetacognitive strategies are used to ‘oversee, regulate or self direct language

The second type of language learning strategies in Rubin’s classification,which is communicative strategies on the process of participating in aconversation, consists of getting meaning across and classifying what thespeaker carried in their minds.

Social strategies, the third type of language learning strategies in this case, arerelated to the social aspect of language learning This kind of strategies showsthe ability to take part in some activities that give chances to be exposed to and

to practise their knowledge

In Oxford’s (1990) classification of language learning strategies, she aimeslanguage-learning strategies at the development of communicative competence.That is the reason why Oxford divided language-learning strategies into twomain groups: direct strategies and indirect strategies

The direct strategies are consequently subdivided into three categories:memory, cognitive and compensation strategies With the memory strategies,learners will know how to create mental linkage, how to apply images andsound, how to review well and how to employ action Whilst, the cognitivestrategies will support to learners with the abilities to practice, to receive andsend messages, to analyse and reason, and to create structure for input andoutput Whereas, the compensation strategies will help learners with guessingintelligently and overcoming limitations in speaking and writing

The indirect strategies, on the other hand, convey three other major issues:metacognitive strategies, affective strategies and social strategies In thissection, the metacognitive strategies play the role of helping center learners’learning, arrange and plan learners’ learning and evaluate learners’ learning;affective strategies will encourage learners themselves, make their anxietylower and increase their emotional temperature; and social strategies will offerlearners opportunities to ask questions, to cooperate with others and toempathize with others

2.1.3 Metacognitive strategies

What does it mean by metacognitive strategies?

Metacognitive strategies along with affective strategies and social strategies areamong the subcategories of indirect strategies arranged by Oxford (1990)

‘Metacognitive’ means beyond, beside, or with the cognitive.Therefore, metacognitive strategies are actions which go beyondpurely cognitive devices, and which provide a way for learners tocoordinate their own learning process Metacognitive strategiesinclude three strategy sets: Centering your learning, Arranging andPlanning your learning, and Evaluating your Learning

(Oxford, 1990, p.136)

In Oxford’s classification, the three sets of metacognitive strategies containeleven other strategies They consist of overviewing and linking with alreadyknown material, paying attention, delaying speech production to focus onlistening, finding out about language learning, organizing, setting goals andobjectives, identifying the purpose of a language task, seeking practiceopportunities, self-monitoring, and self-evaluating

Nevertheless, only ten of those are put in consideration for training in thisstudy The strategy of delaying speech production to focus on listening seems

to be out of ability of high school student to accomplish

Applying metacognitive strategies to the four skills

The 10 metacognitive components utilized in this study are clearly described inthis part, and which skills are suitable to be used with the strategy is alsosuggested as follows

The strategy of overviewing and linking with already known material is a key

figure in language learning activities It can be accomplished in three steps, i.e

making the association This strategy is useful to all the four skills: listening,reading, speaking, and writing (Oxford, 1990).

Paying attention strategy assists learners in deciding what aspects of the

language or situational details to be paid attention to and what to be ignored.This strategy involves two modes, directed attention and selective attention.Directed attention means deciding generally to pay attention to the task andavoid irrelevant distractors In contrast, selective attention involves deciding inadvance to notice particular details Both of these attention modes areimportant for listening In reading, the selective attention is mostly used.Whereas, directed attention is required in writing Oral communication oftendemands directing attention to the general context and content Learners,however, can pay selective attention to particular elements of the speech act(Oxford, 1990)

The strategy of finding out about language learning advises learners to make

efforts to find out how language learning work by reading books and talkingwith other people, and then using this information to help improve their ownlanguage learning All four skills are aided by this strategy (Oxford, 1990)

Organizing strategy is the metacognitive ability to understand and use

conditions related to optimal learning of the language, to organize one’sschedule, physical environment, and language-learning notebook First, havingthe right physical environment is important for every language skill Second,practical schedules can be developed for the language skills that are mostneeded Finally, the notebook is an excellent for writing down new targetlanguage expressions or structures and the contexts in which they wereencountered, class assignments, goals and objectives, strategies which workwell, things to remember and so on (Oxford, 1990)

The skill of setting goals and objectives also means setting aims for language

learning With this skill, learners are able to set long-term goals such aslearning by heart 500 units of vocabulary by the end of the semester or to

accomplish short-term objectives e.g finishing the grammar exercises bySaturday All the four skills may develop well with this strategy (Oxford,1990).

The next component of the metacognition is identifying the purpose of a

language task This strategy helps learners in deciding the purpose of a

particular language task involving listening, speaking, reading, or writing Forexample, listening to the weather broadcasting to know what the weather’s liketomorrow, reading a short story for relaxing (Oxford, 1990)

The metacognitive strategy of planning for a language task can be

accomplished in four steps: describing language task or situation, determiningits requirements, checking one’s own linguistic resources, and determiningadditional language elements or functions necessary for the task or situation,regardless of the language skills involved (Oxford, 1990)

Seeking practice opportunities is one of the most important factors in

metacognition Learners are advised to seek out or to create opportunities topractise the new language with any and all of the four skills in naturalisticsituation, such as joining a foreign language speaking club, watching a foreignlanguage film, or reading a story written in foreign language (Oxford, 1990)

The subcategory of self-monitoring in metacognitive strategy set is the ability

to identify errors in understanding or producing the new language Learners areable to determine which ones are serious, to point out the source of importanterror, and try to eliminate such errors Although monitoring one own error isoften thought to be used mainly in speaking and writing, it is frequently usedfor listening and reading as well (Oxford, 1990)

The last component of metacognition mentioned is self-evaluating skill This

skill allows learners to evaluate their own progress in the new language eithergeneral language progress or progress in any of the four skills They may knowwhether they read faster or how much they understand a conversation after a

2.2 Language learning strategy instruction

This part of the writing will review the role of language learning strategiesinstruction in the development of autonomous learners, some studies related tometacognitive strategy training, types and models of language learningstrategies instruction Language issue and the role of the teacher in thestrategies training process are also discussed in this section

2.2.1 The role of language learning strategies instruction

The main objective of teaching strategies is to develop autonomous learners(O’Malley & Charnot, 1990) which is essential in the learning process(Wenden, 1991) Wenden (1991) also stated that a successful and autonomouslearner is the one who has learnt how to learn and has acquired the learningstrategies, the knowledge about learning, and the attitudes to use these skillsand knowledge independently of a teacher The use of appropriate languagelearning strategies leads to improved proficiency or achievement overall, or inspecific skills areas (Charnot and Kupper, 1989; Cohen, 1990; O’Malley andCharnot, 1990; Wenden and Rubin, 1987) Consequently, second languagestudents’ performances when learning a second language through the use ofstrategies is better than performance of students who do not receive suchtraining (O’Malley and Charnot, 1990) Charnot and O’Malley (1993) alsosupport that strategies training enables students to be made aware of thestrategies that they use and the strategies that they can use to regulate their ownlearning

2.2.2 Studies related to metacognitive strategies instruction

Rasekh (2003) have investigated the effect of metacognitive strategy trainingusing explicit strategy instruction on the development of lexical knowledge ofEFL student The result of the study shows that explicit metacognitive strategytraining has a significant positive effect on the vocabulary learning of EFLstudents

The findings of this study support the foreign language research literature onstrategy training of other components and skills of the language such as readingcomprehension (Kenn, 1989; Carrell, 1998) They also give implications forlearners, teachers, and teacher educators in the realm of TEFL in particular andeducation in general It helps teachers in accomplishing their challenging task

of teaching English in EFL contexts where learners have less exposure tolanguage compared to ESL contexts Teachers can help learners use differentmetacognitive strategies to facilitate their vocabulary learning Textbookwriters, especially in the context of EFL, do not include a sufficient amount ofinformation of learning strategies A need for the inclusion and emphasis onlearning strategies is obvious

The study of O’Malley (1987) concerns training in the use of learningstrategies with minority language students on three academic tasks in English:vocabulary learning, listening to a lecture, and making a brief oral presentation

to others The three language tasks were selected to ensure that the range ofskills presented in the strategy training was representative of tasks found in ahigh school second language curriculum The study used natural classroominstruction so that the instructional procedures could generally be applied bymost teachers An experimental procedure with random assignment of students

to treatment conditions was used to determine the influence of strategy training

The result of the study shows that there may be reasonable limits to theeffectiveness of learning strategy training Strategies may fail to improveperformance when the materials are exceedingly difficult, the cues for strategyuse faded too quickly and the time to study is limited

However, O’Malley confirmed that teachers should be confident that a number

of strategies embedded into their existing curricula can be taught to studentswith only modest extra effort and they can improve the overall classperformance This means that teachers need not feel that their role is limited tosimply providing comprehensible input but can include a variety of learning

suggested that future research should be directed to refining the strategytraining approaches, identifying effects associated with individual strategies,and determining procedures for strengthening the impact of the strategies onstudent outcomes.

Kincannon's study (1999) examined the effects of teaching metacognitivestrategies on performance in a self-directed learning situation The subjects ofthe study were 60 university students of a beginning photography course fornon-art major The treatment was embedded instruction and practice inreflection, planning and evaluation Metacognitive awareness was measuredprior to and after the treatment The use of metacognitive strategies wasmeasured by self-reflection survey, following the first and last assignment.Results showed that the treatment had a positive effect on learning The raise inmetacognitive awareness led the researchers to conclude that instructionalstrategies that teach students to practise metacognitive strategies while learningcourse content improves the use and awareness of these skills as well asperformance

* Justification

Previous researches show that the relationships between the metacognitivestrategies and the four skills of language learning as well as the self-directedlearning ability have been investigated Most of the results have proved thesignificant role and the positive effect of metacognitive strategies on student’sawareness about strategies as well as their performance on some certainlanguage skills However, some remarkable limits are found in O’Malley’s(1987) which are considered conveying more or less the same categories as thepresent study Therefore, more attention will be paid to O’Malley’s suggestionfor future research so that the limits mentioned may be distracted from thisstudy

2.2.3 Types of language learning strategy instruction

O’Malley and Charnot (1993) suggested different ways of providing languagelearning strategies instruction: separate, integrated, direct (explicit) and indirect(implicit) It means that the teacher can choose to integrate strategy instructioninto existing courses or to train strategies separately from the courses Theteachers may also guide students through activities that require the use of aparticular strategy (implicit) or they may inform the students about theanticipated benefits of using the strategy and then give explicit instruction onhow to apply and transfer the strategy as O’Malley & Charnot (1990) definedthat direct training is "learning strategy instruction in which students areinformed about the value and purpose of learning strategies" (O'Malley &Chamot, 1990, p 229) Whereas, embedded training is "guidance in the use oflearning strategies that is embedded in the task materials but not explicitlydefined to the learner as strategy instruction" (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990,p.230)

From another perspective, Oxford (1990) provided three other ways oflanguage learning strategies training: awareness training, one-time strategiestraining, and long-term strategies training

Awareness training is known as “consciousness-raising or familiarizationtraining” (Oxford, 1990, p.202) Through the training learners will becomeaware of and familiar with the general idea of language learning and the waysuch strategies can help them accomplish various language task In this type oftraining, learners do not have to use the strategies in actual, on-the-spotlanguage tasks (Oxford, 1990)

With one-time strategy training, learners will learn and practice one or morestrategies with actual language tasks This kind of training gives learnersinformation on the value of the strategy, when it can be used, how to use it, andhow to evaluate the success of the strategy However, it is connected to a short-

term sequence of strategy training in which very target strategies will beselected and taught in one or just a few sessions (Oxford, 1990).

On the contrary, long-term strategy training, which also ties to the tasks andobjectives of the language programme, is more prolonged and covers a greaternumber of strategies (Oxford, 1990)

2.2.4 Models for language learning strategy instruction

There are a large number of models for language learning strategies instructionhaving been developed since 1990 (see, for example, Charnot et al., 1999;Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Charnot, 1993; Oxford, 1990)

Chamot (1999) and her colleagues have proposed a metacognitive model forlearning strategy instruction that includes four recursive processes: planning,monitoring, problem solving and evaluating In this model, teachers selectlearning strategies to teach depending on the point in a learning task wherestudents need the most help

Rubbin (2001) provides a self-management model consisting fivemetacognitive stratergies: planning, monitoring, evaluating, problem-solving,and implementing This model is partly linear and partly recursive, which alsointeracts with learners’ knowledge and beliefs

Anderson (2002) proposes a five stage interactive process that includesplanning, selecting and using learning strategies, monitoring strategy use,orchestrating various strategies, and evaluating the strategies used

The National Capital Language Resource Center (2003, cited in Charnot(2005)) suggests a metacognitive model which is centered at the learner’sproblem-solving Beside this goal, this model aims at the metacognitivestrategies of planning, monitoring, managing learning and evaluating languagelearning and learning strategy effectiveness The task-based learning strategies

in this model are grouped into four categories: use what you know, use your

instruction model has been applied for elementary immersion classrooms, highschool foreign language classrooms and higher education foreign languageclassrooms (Chamot, 2005).

The CALLA method of learning strategies instruction is another model of thisthis type which was developed for content-based ESL in the United States byAnna Uhl Charnot and J Michael O'Malley (Charnot and O'Malley, 1994).CALLA is an acronym for Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach.This approach is aimed at improving ESL learners’ level of second languageability to cope with the particular demands of academic language use, asopposed to social language use The CALLA method has been found to be aneffective mean of integrating learning strategies instruction with content-basedsecond-language instruction (Robbins, 1996) CALLA also provided a usefulframework for direct language learning strategies instruction The sequence ofinstruction in CALLA is a five-phase recursive cycle for introducing, teaching,practicing, evaluating, and applying learning strategies (Rasekh, 2003)

2.2.5 Language issue in language learning strategy instruction

It has been said that language issue is particular to teaching learning strategies

to language learners In first language contexts, strategies are taught through alanguage medium in which students are proficient, but in second or foreignlanguage contexts, this is not necessarily so Beginning level students, inparticular, do not have the second language proficiency to understandexplanations of why or how to use learning strategies (Macaro, 2001)

Charnot (2004) also suggested that language of strategy instruction should be

in students’ native language when learners are at beginning level becausebeginning students do not have enough second language proficiency tounderstand instructions in the target language (Charnot, 2004)

2.2.6 The role of teachers in language learning strategy instruction

Many of previous research results showed that strategies instruction is mosteffective when the teacher has the major role in developing and presenting theinstruction (Charnot, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Carbonaro, and Robbins 1993,cited in Robbins 1996) In language learning strategies training, Usuki (2001)supported that students themselves need to improve their ability of self-analysisand encourage themselves to trust in their potential At the same time, it isextremely important for students to get the teachers’ support andunderstanding The teachers’ role could be considered as that of making aneffort to understand the learners’ perspectives, and also, teachers should trust intheir students’ potential (Usuki, 2001) Regarding this point, Lier (1996)argued that a teacher does not only transmit the sort of skills and attitudes tolearning that are required, but she/ he also involves changing the way in whichshe/ he relates to learners As a combinated conclusion, Oxford (1990) andLessard (1997) stated that teachers may function as facilitator, helper, guider,consultant, adviser, coordinator, idea person, diagnostician, and co-communicator (Oxford (1990) & Lessard (1997))

2.3 Summary

This chapter has been, in general, filled with the information of existingliterature related to three major issues: learner’s autonomy, language learningstrategies including metacognition, and language learning strategy instruction

In the first section of this chapter, the definitions of the term ‘autonomy’ andthe characteristics of an autonomous learner have been insightfully discussedand clarified, which, directly or indirectly, makes explicit the crucial role oflearners’ autonomy in language acquisition

Regarding LLSs, definitions and clasification systems of LLSs proposed bydifferent reseachers have been critically described and analyzed in such a waythat the strengths and weaknesses have been revealed Then, the definition and

classification proposed by Oxford (1990) have been chosen as the basis for thisstudy

Finally, important issues in the field of LLSI such as the role of LLSI, types ofLLSI, models of LLSI, language issue in LLSI, the role of teacher in LLSIhave been addressed in this chapter

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

The major approach to be adhered to is quantitative approach The followingsare the realizations and details related to this approach

3.1 Research questions and description of variables

This study aims to examine the effect of metacognitive strategies training onthe autonomy in language learning of high school students Directions to go inthe research can be made explicit via the following research questions

How does the metacognitive strategy training affect the language performance

of high school students?

a Do the students’ use and awareness of metacognitive strategies

increase after the training?

b Do they make any progress on their language performance?

3.1.2 Description of variables

It is stated in Creswell’s (2003) that independent variables are variables thatprobably cause, influence, or affect outcomes Whereas, dependent variablesare variables that depend on the independent variables, which means thatdependent variables are the outcomes or results of the influence of theindependent variables (Creswell, 2003)

* Dependent variables

As it is shown in the research question, language performance is the dependent

variable The dependent variable in this study consists of the use and

acquisition of metacognitive skills, measured by the post MAI score and the performance on the written tests for language skills, measured by the change

in performance score

3.2 Data collection instruments

The instruments utilized to collect data in this study were questionnaires andtests

- Questionnaires were employed to find out about student’s use and awareness

of metacognitive strategies

- Tests were conducted to investigate whether students had made any progress

after the application of metacognitive strategies training in the course

in academic settings has traditionally focused on two major components:knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition (Brown, 1987) This view

is supported by many other authors Kumar (1998) adds that knowledge ofcognition refers to what individuals know about their own cognition or about

cognition in general It includes at least three kinds of metacognitiveawareness: Declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge Declarativeknowledge refers to knowing about things Procedural knowledge refers toknowing “how” to do things Conditional knowledge refers to knowing the

“why” and “when” aspects of cognition (Kumar, 1998) On the other hand,Regulation of cognition refers to a set of activities that help students controltheir learning (Gourgey, 1998; Hartman, 1998) Although a number regulatoryskills have been defined in the literature, three basic skills are included in allaccounts: planning, monitoring, and evaluation (Jacobs and Paris, 1987).Schraw (1998) viewed that planning involves the reflection of appropriatestrategies and the allocation of resources that affect performance Monitoringrefers to one’s online awareness of comprehension and task performance.Evaluation refers to appraising the products and efficiency of one’s learning(Schraw, 1998)

Schraw and Dennison (1994) developed a 52- item Likert scale self-reportinventory which measured both knowledge of cognition and regulation ofcognition called Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) (Schraw andDennison, 1994) Each item in the MAI is rated 5-point Likert-type scale whichranges from “1- always false” to “5- always true” to report repondents’ level ofagreement with the 52 items High scores indicate strong agreement It takesapproximately 20 minutes to complete the MAI The MAI offers ameasurement tool for determining students’ level of metacognitive awareness(Hammann, 1998) Many of previous studies have explored the MAI as a datacollection instruments (see in, for instance, Hammann & Steven, 1998; Howard

et al., 2000; Sonya & Reynolds, 1999; Akin et al., 2007) and it has beenconcluded that the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory is a valid and reliableinstrument that can be used in the field of education (Akin et al., 2007)

* Description

There were two questionnaires used in this study

The first questionnaire was the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI)questionnaire, which is adapted from Schraw and Dennison’s (cited inKincannon,1999) (see appendix 1) The MAI utilized in this study has 52statements which participants reacted to by marking a Likert scale withnumbers from 0 (never true) to 10 (always true) (Kincannon, 1999) It was used

in the first stage to understand students’ metacognitive strategies awareness,which was considered the base for dividing students into groups The MAIquestionnaire was translated into Vietnamese by the researcher before sent tostudents Then, in the second stage, the questionnaire was handed out again toexamine the increasing of students’ awareness of metacognitive strategies,answering research question a

The MAI questionnaire contains 2 parts Part 1 aims to seek for personalinformation such as name, age and gender Part 2 consists of 52 items whichwere adapted from Schraw and Dennison’s (1994) These 52 items representthe ten specific metacognitive strategies originated from Oxford (1990) Theorganization of MAI can be shown as in the table below

Metacognitive Stategies

Descriptive Items

Total items in the MAI

The second questionnaire, an inventory of metacognitive use, was conducted

by the researcher, consisting 10 items, three of which are open-ended questionsand seven are close-ended questions The purpose of this questionnaire was to

investigate how students applied their metacognitive understanding when doingthe tests Therefore, the questionnaire was sent to students right after theyfinished the tests What follows are the details of the second questionnaire (seemore in appendix 6 & appendix 8)

Question 1: to seek the use of overviewing and linking strategy.

Question 2: to find out whether the learners use paying attention strategy Question 3: to know how students organize their time to do the test.

Question 4: to find out whether learners set their goals or objectives to

complete the tasks

Question 5: to check the ability of error identification and correction.

Question 6: to know if learners recognize the purpose of a language task.

Question 7: to check the ability to recall the linguistic resources of learners Question 8: to ask for learners’ language use outside the classroom.

Question 9: to investigate how students find out about language learning.

Question 10: to seek the self-evaluating skill.

3.2.2 Tests

* Justification

Walker and Schmidt (2004) describe tests as ‘performance tasks’ or

‘performance assessment’ It is claimed that genuine performance assessmentmust possess at least three features: multiple evaluative criteria, pre-specifiedquality standards, and judgmental appraisal (Popham, 1999 cited in Walker andSchmidt 2004)

Tests are also defined as a contructivist approach to learning and teaching.Teachers demonstrate their commitment to encouraging students’ higher-levelthinking by creating assessment tasks that give students opportunities to applynew knowledge, reflect on their learning, defend opinions and connect whatthey are learning to the world beyond the classroom (Walker & Schmidt, 2004)

When referring tests as interpretation of performance, Walker and Schmidlt(2004) take a refreshingly new attitude toward the use of tests in the classroom.They stated that teacher should use a student’s test results for criterion-referencing instead of for norm-referencing This way provides the teacher withcritical information to inform instruction, to provide feedback to students, and

to make valid and fair judgements about students’ learning and performance.The author also emphasizes that instruction and assessment should supportstudents in becoming suceesful learners (Walker & Schmidt, 2004)

* Description

The tests, which are also organized in the pre-stage and post-stage of the study,measure the relationship among the variables The pre-test and post-test werecarried out to explore the effect of metacognitive strategies on students’progress in language-learning acquisition The tests were designed by theresearcher in such a way that they should contain the tasks that encouragestudents to use both their linguistic knowledge and their metacognitivestrategies to accomplish

The tests can be described more clearly as follows

Both the pre-test and post-test were written tests and were designed based onthe format of the progress tests taken in high school The linguistic knowledgeand techniques used to test learners were certainly confined to what learnershad learned and got familiar with The time allotted for the tests was 45minutes

Below is the format of the tests.

Section 1 is to check for students’ knowledge about pronunciation This section

conveys 8 multiple choice items 4 items are about recognizing phonetic soundthrough words The others are about stress

Section 2 aims to test students’ use of vocabulary and word formation.

Section 3 is for the reading skills In this part, students have to work with 5

multiple choice questions

Section 4 is responsible for testing students’ using of grammar with a

combination of gap filling and multiple choice tasks

Section 5 deals with students’ writing skill It is a kind of sentence building

task, consisting of 4 items

The total mark for 5 sections is 10 The marks among the items are not equal

 Linguistic knowledge for the pretest:

The contents of the prettest covered the followings

- Pronunciation: word stress, sound distinguishing

- Vocabulary: words related to nature, environment, energy, sport games

- Reading skills: All basic reading skills such as skimming for main ideas,

scanning for details.

- Grammar and structures: Relative clauses, omission of relative

pronouns, cleft sentences: both ….and…., not only….but also…., tenses

- Writing: A short paragraph to describe tables, a short paragraph to reportsport events, a short piece of writing about one’s personal collection

 Linguistic knowledge for the posttest:

The posttest aimed at the following contents

- Pronunciation: word stress and sound distinguishing

- Vocabulary: words related to entertainment, space, people and cities

- Reading skills and topic: all basic reading skills, entertainment, space,wonders of the world, English speaking world

- Grammar: Cleft sentences : either…or…, neither….nor…, both…and…,

agreement of subject and verb, ‘Can’, ‘could’, and ‘be able to’, the

passive construction: ‘It’s said that …’, ‘He is said that…’, conditional

The students participating in the study can be described as followings

Their ages varied from 15 to 17 years old Their standards were at intermediatelevel Their textbook, their teachers and conditions under which they studiedEnglish were similar Their objectives were to pass the obligatory tests andexams constituted by the institution As stated above, high school students ofgrade 11 were free from worries and workload, so they directed their interest tolanguage use, classroom activities and they are eagered to take part in the newlearning techniques

60 students The selection was based on the level of students’ metacognitiveawareness after analyzing the MAI questionnaires Therefore, not all thestudents were selected for the treatment because students’ metacognitiveawareness levels were different between the two classes As a result, somestudents were dismissed to make the equivalence of both groups There were

10 pairs who were considered at low level of metacognitive awareness(students never or almost never use metacognitive strategies in their languagelearning and the average of their MAI is from 1.0 to 2.4 of the 5 markingscale), 12 pairs were at medium level (students sometimes use metacognitivestrategies in their language learning and the average of their MAI is from 2.5

to 3.4 of the 5 marking scale), and 8 pairs were at high level (students always

or almost always use metacognitive strategies in their language learning andthe average of their MAI is from 3.5 to 5.0 of the 5 marking scale) Onestudents from each of 30 pairs was randomly pointed to be in the experimentalgroup, whereas the other was in the control group The homogeneity of the twogroups was based on the MAI analyzing results or on the level of students’ useand awareness of metacognitive strategies There were the same number ofstudents in each group who were considered high-aware of metacognitivestrategies, medium-aware of metacognitive strategies, and low-aware ofmetacognitive strategies After being assigned, the experimental group received

40 periods of metacognitive strategies training in 10 weeks The 40 periods wasseparated from the curriculum of the institution

3.4 Metacognitive strategy instruction

3.4.1 Ways of providing strategy instruction

According to characteristics of high school students who were consideredunaware about or not manage well with learning strategies, the type of long-term strategy training was chosen for the instruction Oxford (1990) stated thatthis kind of training is likely to be more effective than one-time training.Because of this selection, the strategies must consequently be taught explicitly.Rubin (1997) supported that teaching students about strategies in this way mayencourage them to find their own ways of learning and it may also help thembecome more autonomous Based on language learning strategies instructionresearch of Oxford (1994), integrated strategy training is suggested rather than

a separate learning process However, the teaching situation in high schooldoes not allow the interference of any programme beyond the compulsory

curriculum Therefore, the type of strategy training in this case was long-term,

explicit, and separated from the existing language programme.

3.4.2 Language of instruction

Sharing the same viewpoint with Charnot (2004), the researcher of this study

used Vietnamese for the metacognitive strategies training courses It is

emphasized that the aim of the course is to make students aware or to raisestudents’ awareness of metacognitive strategies, not to train them for languageuse Therefore, the instruction must be provided in the easiest ways for students

to understand, crossing out as many distracted factors as possible

3.4.3 Model for language learning strategy instruction

As indicated in 2.3.4, the CALLA model seems to be among the most utilized

in language learning strategies research Beside the fact, the CALLA modelwas selected in this study because it contains the learning strategies instruction

component that suggests ways in which “teachers can foster autonomy in theirstudents” (Oxford, 1990, p.216).

This sequence was applied in this study as follows

1 Preparation: The purpose of this phase was to help students identify the

strategies they had already used and to develop their metacognitive awareness

of the relationship between their own mental processes and effective learning

In this step, the teacher explained the importance of metacognitive learningstrategies to the students

2 Presentation: This phase focused on modeling the learning strategy The

teacher talked about the characteristics, usefulness, and applications of thestrategy explicitly through examples

3 Practice: In this phase, students had chances to practice the learning

strategies with authentic learning tasks

4 Evaluation: The main purpose of this phase was to provide students with

opportunities to evaluate their own success in using learning strategies, thusdeveloping their metacognitive awareness of their own learning processes

5 Expansion: In this final phase, students were encouraged to: a) use the

strategies that they found most effective, b) apply these strategies to newcontexts, and c) devise their own individual combinations and interpretations ofmetacognitive learning strategies They were also asked to apply the strategiesthey had learned into other subjects

3.4.4 The materials used in the experiment

Beside the metacognitive strategies instruction following the CALLA modelwhich was conducted to the experimental group explicitly and seperatedly, thesame materials were used to train the language skills of the participants in theirnatural classroom environment The textbook was, obligatorily, the book

‘English 11’ (Advanced Program) – Vietnamese Education Press