元认知知识对研究生阅读理解能力影响的实证研究.doc

学校代码： 10289 分类号：H0 密 级：公开 论 学 号： 102080004文 题 目元知认江 苏 科 技 大 学知对识硕 士 学 位 论 文研究 生 阅 读解理 元认知知识对研究生阅读理解能力影能力影响的实证研究响研究生姓 名 王欢 导 师 姓 名 周树军 申请学位类别 硕士 学位授予单位 江 苏 科 技 大 学 学 科 专 业 外国语言学及应用语言学论文提交日期 2013 年 5 月 5 日 研 究 方 向 应用语言学 论文答辩日期 2013 年 6 月 14 日 答辩委员会主席 王令坤 评阅人 贾冠杰 葛纪红 的 实 证 研 究姓 名王 欢江 苏 科技2013 年 6 月 20 日大 学论 文 独 创 性 声 明本人声明所呈交的学位论文是我本人在导师指导下进行的研究工作及取得的研 究成果。尽我所知，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，论文中不包含其他人已 经发表或撰写过的研究成果，也不包含为获得江苏科技大学或其它教育机构的学位或 证书而使用过的材料。与我一同工作的同志对本研究所做的任何贡献均已在论文中作 了明确的说明并表示谢意。学位论文作者签名：日期：学 位 论 文 使 用 授 权 声 明江苏科技大学有权保存本人所送交的学位论文的复印件和电子文稿，可以将学位 论文的全部或部分上网公布，有权向国家有关部门或机构送交并授权其保存、上网公 布本学位论文的复印件或电子文稿。本人电子文稿的内容和纸质论文的内容一致。除 在保密期内的保密论文外，允许论文被查阅和借阅。研究生签名：导师签名：日期：日期：AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE INFLUENCES OF METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE ON MA STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSIONA ThesisSubmitted In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for Degree of Master of ArtsBy Wang HuanUnder the Supervision of Associate Professor Zhou ShujunSchool of Foreign Languages Jiangsu University of Science and TechnologyJune, 2013AcknowledgementsMy sincere gratitude first and foremost goes to my supervisor, Associate Professor Zhou Shujun, who has given me the most valuable advice and has carefully examined my draft as well as made necessary corrections. Without his encouragement and patient guidance, this dissertation would not have reached its present form.I am also very thankful for the 125 MA students from Nanjing Normal University who volunteered to take part in this empirical study. Without their participation, I could not finish my research.At last, I am greatly indebted to all my teachers and my classmates in Jiangsu University of Science and Technology. During the writing of my dissertation, they have enlightened me with many animating suggestions.Here, I am the only person responsible for errors in the dissertation.IAbstractMetacognition is defined as: thinking about thinking (Anderson, 2002:23), it refers to the knowledge and control that we have over our cognitive processes. Existed domestic and foreign researches show that metacognitive knowledge has a great impact on English learning, and can play a regulating role in the learning process, and thus is very important for English reading comprehension. English Reading is both a relatively independent cognitive behavior; and a metacognitive activity, including the behavior of setting reading goals, adjusting according to the target and evaluating the reading material. This thesis uses Flavells theory of metacognition and OMalleys theory of metacognitive strategies, aims to investigate what roles metacognitive knowledge plays for MA students in reading comprehension and how metacognitive knowledge, the level of English language and English reading level relate to each other. This thesis tries to give tentative answers to the following questions:(1) What is the overall situation of Chinese MA students metacognitive knowledge on reading comprehension?(2) If the level of English language proficiency has been controlled, is metacognition and English reading test performance relevant?(3) Do students with a higher level of metacognitive ability show a higher level of English reading ability than those with the lower levels?(4) And what is the interrelationship among metacognition, the level of English proficiency and English reading comprehension ability?By controlling the influence of English proficiency, the author used metacognitive knowledge questionnaire and English reading test to investigate the relationship between metacognitive knowledge and MA students English reading comprehension performance, data analysis shows that:(1) In students reading system of metacognitive knowledge, the lack of strategic knowledge of procedures and conditions and task knowledge needs to be addressed.(2) Metacognition and English reading test performance are relevant.(3) There are significant differences in the performance of the students at different metacognitive levels of in English reading.(4) There are three paths for the two factors to affect the level of English reading. The first path is the direct impact on English reading from the level of English language; the second path is the direct impact on English reading from metacognitive knowledge; the last path is the indirect impact on English Reading from metacognitive knowledge by way of the English proficiency.The conclusion has significant implications for English reading class. Based on the analysis of empirical research data, the author put forward some strategies for teacher to following so as to improve reading class.Key Words: Metacognitive knowledge; English reading comprehension; English proficiency摘要元认知是指对认知的认知(Anderson, 2002:23)，是指我们具有的超过认知过 程的知识和进行调节的能力。研究表明，元认知知识对英语学习有重大的影响， 可以对学习的过程起到调控作用。英语阅读既是一种相对独立的认知行为，也是 一种元认知活动，包括：建立阅读目标、根据目标调整阅读策略、评价阅读材料 等过程，元认知知识对此也具有重要调控作用。目前，以硕士生阅读能力为对象 的研究并不多见。本研究尝试运用 Flavell 的元认知理论和 OMalley 的元认知策 略理论，对硕士生在英语阅读理解过程中元认知知识、英语语言水平和英语阅读 理解水平之间关系的进行初步探讨，理清元认知知识对硕士生英语阅读理解的影 响，尝试回答以下问题：(1)中国硕士生的阅读理解元认知知识总体状况如何？ (2)如果控制了英语语言水平的影响，元认知知识与英语阅读理解是否相关？(3)元认知知识水平较高的学生是否比元认知知识水平较低的学生表现出较高的英语阅读理解水平？(4)元认知知识、英语语言水平与英语阅读理解水平三者间相互影响施加的 路径是怎样的？作者通过控制英语语言水平这一因素的影响，采用元认知知识问卷和英语阅 读测试对学生进行调查，并对元认知知识与中国硕士生英语阅读理解的关系进行 研究。数据分析结果表明：(1)在学生的阅读元认知知识体系中，程序性和条件性的策略知识相对欠缺， 而任务知识也须提高，这些都应该引起重视。(2)元认知知识与英语阅读理解是紧密相关的。 (3)不同元认知知识水平的学生在英语阅读理解上的表现是有显著差异的。 (4)可以对英语阅读理解水平加以影响的有两个因素、三条路径：一是英语语言水平直接影响英语阅读理解水平；二是元认知知识直接影响英语阅读理解水 平；三是元认知知识通过英语语言水平对英语阅读间接影响。本研究的结论对教师的实际英语阅读教学具有较高的理论和实践价值。基于 本研究的研究结果，本文提出了一些改进英语阅读教学的策略。关键词：元认知；英语阅读理解；英语语言水平ContentsAcknowledgementsIAbstract (English)IIIAbstract (Chinese)VTable of ContentsVIIList of Tables and FiguresIXChapter One Introduction1Significance of the Study1Motivations of the Study3Structure of the Dissertation4Chapter Two Literature Review6Studies Already Made Abroad6Studies Already Made at Home15Chapter Three Theoretical Framework18Metacognition and Types of Knowledge18Learning Strategies22Metacognitive Strategies23Cognitive Strategies25Social / Affective Strategies26Flavells Model of Cognitive Monitoring26Chapter Four Methodology30Research Questions30Subjects31Research Design31Instruments31Questionnaires31English Reading Test33Validating the Reading Test35English Proficiency Test36Data Collection36Chapter Five Results and Discussions40Results and Data Analysis40Statistical Data Analysis40Linear Regression Analysis44Overall Discussion46Chapter Six Conclusion49Answers to the Research Questions49Conclusion of the Study50Implications for English Reading Class50To Use Metacognitive Strategies Consciously. 错误!未定义书签。1To Enhance the Training of Metacognitive Strategies错误 ! 未 定 义 书 签。To Strengthen Metacognitive Experiences and Metacognitive Monitoring . 错误!未定义书签。Limitations of the Study50Bibliography56List of Tables and FiguresTable 1 Metacognition concepts19Table 2 Constructs and contents of metacognitive knowledge questionnaires33Table 3 Specific reading skills which students need to demonstrate during the reading process34Table 4 Distributions for the variables of reading score36Table 5 Data on metacognitive knowledge, English reading comprehension and English reading level41Table 6 Scores of every item in the metacognitive knowledge questionnaire41Table 7 Correlation coefficient among metacognitive knowledge, English proficiency and English reading comprehension43Table 8 Partial correlation coefficient of metacognitive knowledge and English reading comprehension ( control variable: English proficiency )43Table 9 Differences in the t-test results of different metacognitive levels of student performance in English reading comprehension44Table 10 Regression analysis 1: Metacognitive Knowledge and English proficiencys effect on English Reading Comprehension45Table 11 Regression analysis 2: Metacognitive Knowledges effect on English Proficiency45Figure 1 Consolidated results of the two regression analysis verified the path analysis diagram45Chapter One IntroductionOur current understanding of reading strategies has been shaped significantly by such researches on what expert readers do as Bazerman (1985), Pressley & Afflerbach (1995), and Wyatt et al. (1993). These studies demonstrate that successful comprehension does not occur automatically. Rather, it depends on directed cognitive effort, referred to as metacognitive processing, which consists of knowledge about and regulation of cognitive processing (Baker & Brown, 1984). During reading, metacognitive processing is expressed through strategies, which are “procedural, purposeful, effortful, willful, essential, and facilitative in nature” (Alexander & Jetton, 2000:295). “The reader must purposefully or intentionally or willfully invoke strategies” (Alexander & Jetton, 2000:295), and does so to regulate and enhance learning from text. Through metacognitive strategies, a reader allocates significant attention to controlling, monitoring, and evaluating the reading process (Pressley, 2000; Pressley, Brown, El-Dinary & Afflerbach, 1995). The metacognitive reader plans the reading task, monitors whether a coherent representation of the text is being maintained, and adopts different processing strategies related to the goals and outcomes of ongoing reading.The present study describes the development and validation of a questionnaire that is designed to measure MA students use of metacognitive reading strategies for comprehension and for studying while reading school-related materials, and its implications in the teaching of English reading.Significance of the StudyDuring past decades, prior research supports this point of view that college students select and use reading strategies that are of practical use in gaining success in academic tasks. Wade, Trathen, and Schraw (1990) recruited 67 college volunteers who read a 15-page passage at the 11th-grade level followed by a recall test. This type of task, involving extensive reading and subsequent recall, is typical of many college assignments. Besides requiring complex cognitive and linguistic processing, readingis a situated taskit takes place in a context with specific task demands (Alexander & Jetton, 2000).Strategy use varies not only with the processing skills of the reader, but also with the knowledge domain (Nist & Holschuh, 2000), and with the tasks involved (Weinstein & Hume, 1998). In order to understand students reading behaviors, it is necessary to take the specific situations in which reading occurs into consideration, and the reading tasks that the individuals may confront. As it has been mentioned in the think-aloud protocols of expert academics, one of their aims was to obtain more information about research problems. For a MA student, the associated goals and assigned tasks would be two different things, and thus we would expect to observe differences in what students did in these respective groups when they were reading.Some instruments, like the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) (Weinstein, Schulte, & Palmer, 1987) and the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, and McKeachie, 1991, 1993), assess a broad array of motivational and learning factors related to college learning and study. They were not meant to measure reading strategies per se. Many questions in the LASSI and MSLQ do not separate reading strategies from other (e.g., listening) strategies clearly (e.g., “Whenever I read or hear an assertion or conclusion in this class, I think about possible alternatives”) (Pintrich et al., 1991). In both instruments, questions about reading strategies occur on several scales and are mixed in with items that are not about reading (e.g., “When they are available, I attend group review sessions”) (Weinstein et al., 1987).Mokhtari and Reichard (2002) developed a related assessment tool. They used published studies to identify 100 reading strategies and then applied factor analysis to reduce the list to thirty strategies. Because their instrument was normalized using students in Grades 6-12, it is not clear that it would apply to college students. Its important that only two of the thirty strategies were explicitly concerned with studying as opposed to comprehension (e.g., “I underline or circle information in the text to help me remember it,” and “I try to picture or visualize information to help remember what I read” ). Thus, their instrument would not be useful in assessingstudents use of strategies related to the practical aspects of college study.Above all, neither of these instruments can be used to characterize the dimensions or constructs in MA students reading strategies.The aim of the present study is to develop an assessment instrument for measuring students use of metacognitive strategies for English reading comprehension and do this research at the MA level. Then with the usage of the instrument, the author can draw conclusion from the results and discussions of the study, and then summarize some implications for further study and English teaching in the future.Motivations of the StudySince a language test is a means to infer an individuals L2 reading ability as well as to assist decision-making in an individuals performance, test validation research is needed to inform us of possible factors that affect language test performance. As Alderson (2000) points out, we are not interested in how well a test taker can perform a reading test, but rather we are interested in the kind of inferences we can make based on test takers reading scores. Much of what is involved during reading test-taking should be similar to that in non-test reading. Hence, strategies such as cognitive strategies (e.g., comprehending, memory and retrieval) and metacognitive strategies (e.g., planning, monitoring and evaluating) that are theoretically encapsulated in L2 reading in a non-test language use context (i.e., for making sense of the language material or task) should contribute to the reading test performance.In the past decades, there has been research that aims to understand the nature of cognitive and metacognitive strategies that influence language test performance. The model of metacognitive strategy use is a unidimensional construct consisting of a single set of assessment processes (e.g., goal setting, planning, monitoring, self-evaluating an