Constructing a Metacognitive Knowledge Framework for Post-Secondary EFL Reading Teachers’ Summarizing Strategies Instruction with Expository Text: A Case Study, Phase I

Wei Xu, James Carifio, Lorraine Dagostino

College of International Education, Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai, China.
School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Lowell, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2012.326124                

Abstract

This article reports on the first phase of a case study done by a Chinese post-secondary EFL reading teacher on her exploratory inquiry into the metacognitive teaching knowledge needed by EFL Reading teachers to teach summarizing strategies with expository text to EFL undergraduates. Guided by a for- malized model of instructional materials development, Phase I was an exploring process, starting from constructing a general metacognitive knowledge framework and proceeding to elaborate the detailed framework of the actual metacognitive knowledge needed by EFL reading teachers as to summarizing strategies instruction with expository text. The results of phase I were summarized in a monograph di- rected at teaching post-secondary EFL Reading teachers the framework and actual metacognitive know- ledge they needed to know. This monograph was positively reviewed by a cross-sectional panel of 12 ex- perts. This article concludes with a critical reflection on the methodology and value of this metacognitive knowledge exploration.

Keywords

Metacognition; Metacognitive Knowledge; Theory Creation; Instructional Materials Development; English as a Foreign Language; Teacher Training

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and adult reader. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 3-38. doi:10.1007/BF01326548
[2]	Baker, L. (2002). Metacognition in comprehension instruction. In C. C. Block, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research- based best practices (pp. 77-95). New York: Guilford Press.
[3]	Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
[4]	Baumann, J. F., Jones, L. A., & Seifert-Kessell, N. (1993). Monitoring reading comprehension by thinking aloud. Athens, GA: National Reading Research Center, University of Georgia.
[5]	Block, C., & Israel, S. (2004). The ABCs of performing highly effective think-alouds. The Reading Teacher, 58, 154-167. doi:10.1598/RT.58.2.4
[6]	Brown, A. L. (1985). Metacognition: The development of selective attention strategies for learning from texts. In H. Singer, & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (3rd ed. 501-526). Newark: International Reading Association.
[7]	Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Day, J. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from text. Educational Researcher, 10, 14- 21. doi:10.3102/0013189X010002014
[8]	Byrnes, J. P. (2001). Cognitive development and learning in instructional contexts (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
[9]	Carifio, J. (1975). A standard and command-wide model for developing scientific and technical instructional materials. Alexandria, VA: United States Office of Naval Research.
[10]	Carifio, J. (1977). Toward a macro model of instructional components. Annual Meeting of Eastern Educational Research Association, MA: Boston.
[11]	Carifio, J. (2003). An instructional text evaluation protocol. Annual Conference of the New England Educational Research Organization, NH: Portsmouth.
[12]	Carifio, J. (2005). Towards a standard integrated information processing/cognitive model of learning. The 8th Biennial Conference of the International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Group. England: Leeds.
[13]	Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1996). The cognitive academic language learning approach: A model for linguistically diverse classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 96, 259-273. doi:10.1086/461827
[14]	Dagostino, L., & Carifio, J. (1994a). Evaluative Reading and Literacy: A Cognitive View. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
[15]	Dagostino, L., & Carifio, J. (1994b). Establishing the logical validity of instructional activities for teaching reading evaluatively. Journal of Reading Improvement, 31, 14-22.
[16]	Erikson, L. (2006). An integrated approach to citizenship education for grades 1-8 in the 21st century. Ed.D. Thesis. Lowell, University of Massachusetts.
[17]	Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). The knower and known: The nature of knowledge in research on teaching. Review of Research on Teaching, 20, 3-56.
[18]	Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.34.10.906
[19]	Flores, M. (2005). Instructional strategies, conditions, characteristics, and contexts for successfully teaching Hispanic Caribbean students. Ed.D. Thesis. Lowell, University of Massachusetts.
[20]	Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
[21]	Garner, R. (1990). When children and adults do not use learning strategies: Toward a theory of settings. Review of Educational Research, 60, 517-529. doi:10.3102/00346543060004517
[22]	Glaser, R., & Chi, M. T. (1988). Overview. In M. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 15-28). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[23]	Griffith, P. L., & Ruan, J. (2005). What is metacognition and what should be its role in literacy instruction? In S. E. Israel, C. C. Block, K. L. Bauserman, & K. Kinnucan-Welsch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning: Theory, assessment, instruction, and professional development (pp. 3-18). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[24]	Hacker, D. J. (1998). Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunloky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[25]	Hartman, H. J. (2001). Teaching metacognitively. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 149-172). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[26]	Israel, S., & Massey, D. D. (2005). Think alouds as a means for building metacognition with middle schoolers. In C. C. Block, S. E. Israel, K. Kinnucan-Welsch, & K. L. Bauserman (Eds.), Metacognition and literacy learning (pp. 183-199). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[27]	Jones, R. C. (2007). Making sense in social studies: What? How? When? http://www.readingquest.org/conditional.html
[28]	Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
[29]	Kwong, B. (2008). The development and validation of a research-based, tiered new teacher induction program guide for Massachusetts public schools. Ed.D. Thesis. Lowell, University of Massachusetts.
[30]	Massey, D. D. (2003). A comprehension checklist: What if it doesn’t make sense? The Reading Teacher, 57, 81-84.
[31]	Merton, R. K. (1936). The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. American Sociological Review, 1, 894-904. doi:10.2307/2084615
[32]	Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
[33]	Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y. & Wixson, K. K. (1994). Becoming a strategic reader. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 788-811). Newark: International Reading Association.
[34]	Pellitier, P. (2004). Towards a reader-text-context theoretical model for reading literary work. Ed.D. Thesis. Lowell, University of Massachusetts.
[35]	Perla, R. J. (2006). Use and augmentation of a formal model and theory to develop instructional material to teach undergraduates about the nature of science, scientific knowledge and scientific change. Ed.D. Thesis. Lowell, University of Massachusetts.
[36]	Perla, R., & Carifio, J. (2011). Theory creation, modification, and testing: An information-processing model and theory of the anticipated and unanticipated consequences of research and development. Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation, 7, 84-110.
[37]	Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup, & S. J. Samuel (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 291-309). Newark: International Reading Association. doi:10.1598/0872071774.13
[38]	Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., & Schneider, W. (1987). Cognitive strategies: Good strategy users coordinate metacognition and knowledge. Annals of Child Development, 4, 89-129.
[39]	Raphael, T. E. (1986). Teaching question answer relationships. The Reading Teacher, 39, 516-522.
[40]	Reynolds, R. E. (1992). Selective attention and prose learning: Theoretical and empirical research. Educational Psychology Review, 4, 345-391. doi:10.1007/BF01332144
[41]	Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (1989). Memory development between 2 and 20. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-9717-5
[42]	Squire, L. R. (1987). Memory and brain. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
[43]	Van Dijk, T. A. (1980). Macrostructures: An interdisciplinary study of global structures in discourse, interaction, and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[44]	Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press, Inc.