IDENTIFYING THE NATURE OF METACOGNITION INSTRUCTION IN READING CLASSROOMS
MetadataShow full item record
Metacognition helps control cognitions through the actions and interactions of metacognitive knowledge, experiences, and strategies. Since 1979, metacognition has been extensively studied and found to be an effective tool for learning. In reading, metacognition is associated with improved vocabulary, reading awareness, strategies, comprehension, and task performance. Research confirmed metacognition can be successfully taught. However, it has limited influence on mainstream classrooms; classroom instruction lacks pedagogies of metacognition. Paradoxically, teachers’ practices have been assessed inconsistently and independent of students’ metacognition. For these problems, this study developed a pedagogy of metacognition (PMR) and examined the structural validity of its measurement instrument (ITMR). Following a comprehensive literature review, a PMR consisted of fostering students’ metacognitive knowledge, adopting goal-directedness, integrating language of thinking, scaffolding students’ strategic reading, encouraging their independence with strategic reading, assessing metacognition, and prolonging instruction. Then, scale validation procedures were followed. After scale items were generated, QUAID examination, expert, cognitive, and focus-group interviews were conducted for content and construct validity. Following the ITMR’s initial simulation, the data were collected from reading teachers in the United States of America. The data were collected by a computer-assisted survey method and a non-probability sampling technique. Then, the data were analyzed by a factor analysis method, Welch’s, and Spearman’s tests. The ITMR at elementary school level was found to have a unidimensional model accounting for 60% of the total variance (α.97). There were no mean differences in teachers’ self-reported metacognition instruction practices at any grade levels. All dimensions of the ITMR were strongly and positively correlated. By these findings, the significance of this study was recognized and its contributions to the literature were summarized. Also, the discrepancy between the literature and the ITMR and the congruence of metacognition instruction practices across elementary grades was discussed. Assessment practices were recognized as potential aids for classroom metacognition instruction. Future studies were recommended to improve the validity of the ITMR and understanding of classroom metacognition instruction. Educational implications aimed to support both in-service and pre-service teachers as possible. Finally, limitations with scale development, scale’s generalizability, data collection, and analyses were discussed.