Academic journal article Reading Improvement

Effects of a Metacognitive Reading Program on the Reading Achievement and Metacognitive Strategies of Students with Cases of Dyslexia

Academic journal article Reading Improvement

Effects of a Metacognitive Reading Program on the Reading Achievement and Metacognitive Strategies of Students with Cases of Dyslexia

Article excerpt

To study the effects of Metacognitve Reading Program on Reading achievement and metacognitive strategies of students with cases of dyslexia, the author conducted a single-case quasi-experimental. The conceptual framework of the study was based on the theories of cognitive processes stating that metacognition helps regulate the flow of information through working memory and thus improve learning performance. Subjects chosen were 2 incoming grade two students and 2 incoming grade three students diagnosed as dyslexics. They were referred to Reading Works, a learning center, where they attended a Metacognitive Reading Program. The findings suggest that the use of metacognitive strategies in learning how to read positively improves the subjects Reading achievement. Implications to reading instruction; metacognitive learning; and metacognitive strategy instruction are discussed.

**********

The roots of low achievement are numerous and varied. Educators and policy makers have implicated a wide range of factors that they perceive to be causes of low levels of achievement of school children.

Many students who encounter achievement problems in school frequently warrant the scrutiny of teachers. They are victims of pre-judgment that they can do no better.

Dyslexic students are given attention in this study, in the hope to help them learn better and thus do not suffer anymore from the disappointing experiences in school.

This research attempted to study the effects of the Metacognitive Reading Program on the Reading Achievement and Metacognitive Strategies of students with cases of dyslexia.

Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. How do students differ in terms of reading achievement before and after exposure to the Metacognitive Reading Program?

2. How do students differ in terms of metacognitive strategies before and after the Metacognitive Reading Program?

A. Metacogniton and Instruction

Metacognitive skills seem to be involved in many classroom cognitive activities: comprehension, evaluation, reading, writing, and problem solving, among others. In his discussion of metacognition, Flavell (1985) analyzed it as two domains: metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences. Metacognitive knowledge refers to an individual's knowledge and beliefs about cognitive matters, gained from experience and stored in long-term memory. Humans acquire metacognitive knowledge about people, tasks, and strategies. In a classroom, metacognitive knowledge of tasks operates when the nature of a task forces learners to think about how they will manage. If it is a difficult task, perhaps learners decide to allocate more time, or perhaps to prepare an outline. Metacognitive experiences are either cognitive or affective experiences that relate to cognitive activities. For example, while a reader is reading this he may feel a little uncertain or doubtful about one of the topics, or he may be quite concerned that he does not understand it. As Flavell (1985) noted, metacognitive experiences are most likely to occur when careful, conscious monitoring of one's cognitive efforts is required. The uncertainty or confidence that one may feel about a topic is tied to relevant metacognitive knowledge.

Young children do not learn these memory strategies as readily as do older children and adults; and they are also far less able to organize material. More than this, they are less aware of the importance of doing so. One of the very important differences between them and older learners is that they are not yet reflective about themselves as knowers; they have not yet recognized the special skills that allow them to extract information, to organize, to learn, and of course, to remember. Put another way, they know far less about knowing; they understand less about understanding (Flavell, 1985). …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.