You are here

Home » Content

General and Specific Cognitive/Metacognitive Reading Strategies Used by Field-Dependent/Independent Iranian EFL Learners

Journal Name:

  • Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The current study attempted to investigate if there was a significant difference between field-dependent/independent Iranian EFL learners in terms of the use of cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies. The difference between these two groups was studied with reference to both their general reading strategy use and the strategies they used in reading a particular text they were invited to read. To this end, 62 EFL students (27 males and 35 females) who were assumed to be skilled in L2 reading were chosen from Urmia University. As a first step, Group Embedded Figures Test was employed in order to assign the participants into either field-dependent or field-independent groups. Next, they were requested to answer a self-reported reading strategies questionnaire to determine their general reading strategies utilized across various contexts. After one week’s interval, a reading text was given to the participants to read first and then to answer another adapted reading strategies questionnaire to identify context-specific strategies they actually used in the reading task that they had just completed. The frequency of general/specific cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies employed by male and female field-dependent/independent students were calculated and compared through Chi-Square statistical test using SPSS software. The results indicated that there was a significant difference between field-dependent and field-independent participants in terms of using general metacognitive and specific cognitive reading strategies. However, there was no significant difference between Field -dependent/independent learners regarding the use of general cognitive as well as specific metacognitive reading strategies.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon independent-iranian-efl-learners.pdf
  • 3
17-35
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Abraham, R.G. (1985). Field-dependence/independence and the teaching of grammar.
TESOL Quarterly, 19, 689 702.
Almasi, J. F. (2003). Teaching strategic process in reading. New York, NY: The Guilford
Press.
Alptekin, C., & Atakan, S. (1990). Field dependence-independence and hemisphericity
asvariables in L2 achievement. Second Language Research, 6(2), 135-149.
Anderson, N. J. (2003). Teaching reading. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language
teaching (pp. 67-86). New York: McGraw Hill Publishers.
Behnam, B., & Fathi, M. (2009). The relationship between reading performance and field-dependence/ independence cognitive styles. Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign
Language and Literature,1(1), 49-62.
Bernhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading development in a second language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL
Quarterly, 26, 463-494.
Bressler, C.E., (2002). Literary criticism: An introduction to theory and practice. New Jersey:
Pearson.
Brown, A. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, &
W.F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspective from
cognitivepsychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education (pp.453-481).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brown, H. D. (1993). Principles of language learning and teaching. Indiana: Prentice Hall.
Brown, H.D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching.New Jersey: Prentice Hall
.
Brown, H.D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th Ed.). White Plains,
NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Brumfit, C.J. (1980). Problems and principles in English teaching. Oxford: Pergamon.
Carrell, P.L. (1989).Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern
Language Journal, 73(2), 121-134.
Carter, E. (1988). The relationship of field-dependent/independent cognitive style to
Spanishlanguage achievement and proficiency: A preliminary report. Modern
Language Journal, 72, 21-30.
Sadeghi, K. and Langhroudy, E. P. (2012). General and specific cognitive/metacognitive reading strategies used
by field-dependent/ındependent ıranian efl learners. Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(3), 17-35.
32
Chapelle, C. (1995). Field independence/dependence in the L2 classroom. In J. Reid (Ed.),
Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 158-168). Boston, MA: Heinle and
Heinle.
Chappelle, C., & Roberts, C. (1986).Field independence and ambiguity tolerance as predictors
of proficiency in English as a second language.Language Learning,36(1), 27-46.
Davey, B. (1990). Field dependence-independence and reading comprehension questions:
Task and reader interactions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15(3), 241-250.
Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition: Learning in classroom .Oxford:
Blackwell.
Farhadi, H., Jafarpur, A., & Birjandi, P. (2009). Testing language skills from theory to
practice. Tehran: SAMT.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Gass, S.M., & Selinker, L. (1994). Second language acquisition: An introductory course.
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ghonsooly, B. & Eghtesadee, A.R., (2006). Role of Cognitive Style of Field- dependence/
independence in Using Metacognitive and Cognitive Reading Strategies by a Group of
Skilled and Novice Iranian Students of English. Asian EFL Journals, 8(4), 119-150.
Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the
Reading Specialist, 6, 126-135.
Green, J. & Oxford, R. L. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency and
gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 261-297.
Griffin, R., & Franklin, G. (1996). Can college academic performance be predicted using a
measure of cognitive style? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 24(4), 375-379.
Griffiths, R., & Sheen, R. (1992). Disembedded figures in the landscape: A reappraisal of L2
research on field dependence/independence. Applied Linguistics, 13, 133-148.
Hamdan, A.B., Ghafar, M. N., Sihes, A.J., & Binti-Atan, S. (2010), The cognitive and
metacognitive reading strategies of foundation course students in teacher education
institute in Malaysia. European Journal of Social Sciences, 13(1), 133-144.
Hansen, L. (1984). Field dependence-independence and language testing: Evidence from six
Pacific island cultures. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 311-324.
Honarvar, H. (2011). Literary prose: A selection. Tehran: SAMT.
Hudson, T. (2007). Teaching second language reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sadeghi, K. and Langhroudy, E. P. (2012). General and specific cognitive/metacognitive reading strategies used
by field-dependent/ındependent ıranian efl learners. Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(3), 17-35.
33
Israel, S. E. (2007). Using metacognitive assessments to create individualized reading
instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Iwai, Y. (2011). The effects of metacognitive reading strategies: Pedagogical implications for
EFL/ESL teachers. The Reading Matrix, 11(2), 150-159.
Jamieson, J. (1992). The cognitive styles of reflection/impulsivity and field-independence/dependence and ESL success. Modern Language Journal, 76, 491-501.
Johnson J., Prior S., & Artuso M. (2000). Field dependence as a factor in second language
communicative production. Language Learning, 50, 529-567.
Kang, S. (1999). Learning styles: Implications for ESL/EFL instruction. FORUM, 37(4), 6-17.
Kay, J., & Gelshenen, R. (1998). America writes: Learning English through American Short
Stories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keefe, J. W. (1979). Learning styles: An overview. Restone, AV: National Association of
Secondary School Principals.
Kheirzadeh. Sh. & Kassaian, Z. (2011). Field-dependence/independence as a factor affecting
performance on listening comprehension sub-skills: The case of Iranian EFL learners.
Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(1), 188-195.
Kinsella, K. (1996). Designing group work that supports and enhances diverse classroom
work styles. TESOL Journal, 6 (1), 24–31.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Li, Y. & Wang, C. (2010). An empirical study of reading self-efficacy and the use of reading
strategies in the Chinese EFL context. Asian EFL Journal, 12(2), 143- 162.
Littlemore, J. (2001). An empirical study of the relationship between cognitive style and the
use of communication strategy. Applied Linguistics, 22, 241-265.
McCarter, S., & Ash, J. (2007). IELTS testbuilder.Oxford: Macmillan Education.
Messick, S. (1989). The nature of cognitive styles: problems and promise in educational
practice. Educational Psychologist, 19, 59-74.
Nilforoushan, N. & Afghari, A. (2007). The effect of field-dependence/independence as a
source of variation in EFL learners writing performance. Iranian Journal of Language
Studies, 1(2), 103-116.
Nowruzi, M., & Birjandi, P. (2007). Oral reproduction of stories (2).Tehran: SAMT.
Sadeghi, K. and Langhroudy, E. P. (2012). General and specific cognitive/metacognitive reading strategies used
by field-dependent/ındependent ıranian efl learners. Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(3), 17-35.
34
O’Malley, J.M. & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Mazanares, G., Russo, R., &Kupper, L.
(1985). Learning strategies applications with students of English as a second
language. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 555-584.
Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New
York: Harper Collins.
Ozek, Y & Civelek, M. (2006).A study on the use cognitive reading strategies by ELT
students. Asian EFL Journal, Professional Teachers Articles, 14(1), 1-26.
Phakiti, A. (2006). Modeling cognitive and metacognitive strategies and their relationship to
EFL reading test performance. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 1, 53-95.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of
constructivelyresponsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: The Erlbaum Group.
Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S.
J.Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 291-309).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Reid, J. M. (1987). The language style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly 21(1):
87-111.
Salmani-Nodoushan, M.A. (2007). Is field-dependence or independence a predictor of EFL
reading performance? TESL Canada Journal, 24(2), 82-108.
Shang, H.F. (2011), Reading Strategy Use, Self-Efficacy and EFL
ReadingComprehension. Asian EFL Journal, 12(2), 18-42
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading
strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 431-449.
Shi, C. (2011). A study of the relationship between cognitive styles and learning strategies.
Higher Education Studies, 1(1), 20-26.
Sims, J. & Sims, R. (2006). Learning styles and learning: A key to meeting the
accountability design in education. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Singhal, M. (2001). Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive awareness, L2
readers. The Reading Matrix, 1(1), 1-23.
Souzandehfar, M.A., & Souzandehfar, M. (2011). The effects of field-dependence/independence cognitive style and gender on second language speaking
performance. California Linguistic Notes, 36(2), 1-21.
Vahabi, Sh. (2006). The relationship between EFL learners FD/FI cognitive style, proficiency,
and communication strategies in writing. ILI language teaching journal, 2, 145-150.
Sadeghi, K. and Langhroudy, E. P. (2012). General and specific cognitive/metacognitive reading strategies used
by field-dependent/ındependent ıranian efl learners. Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(3), 17-35.
35
Wenden, A. & Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. Englewood Cliffs,
NY: Prentice-Hall.
Witkin, H.A., & Goodenough, D.R. (1981). Cognitive styles: Essence and origin. New York:
Wiley.
Witkin, H. A., Raskin, E., & Oltman, P. K. (1971).Group Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto,
California: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com