qo$l A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES IN EIGHTH GRADE READING IMPROVEMENT STUDENTS DISSERTATION Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of North Texas in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By Bernadette Tyler Jeffers, B.S., M.Ed. Denton, Texas December, 1990 Jeffers, Bernadette Tyler, A Comparative Study of Metacognitive Differences in Eighth Grade Reading Improvement Students. Doctor of Philosophy (Reading Education), December, 1990, 229 pp., 24 tables, 1 illustration, bibliography, 88 titles. The purposes of this study are to determine the level of growth by reading improvement students when metacognitive skills are-taught and to determine which instructional approach is the most effective in maximizing reading comprehension. The organization of the study includes a statement of the problem, a review of the literature, the methodology used in the statistical analysis of the data, the analysis of data, the findings, conclusions, educational implications, and recommendations for additional research. The instrument used to assess grade gains was the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Level E, with Form 1 as the pretest and Form 2 as the posttest. These comprehension subtests were given to both the control group and the experimental group. The pretest was used to assess standing at the beginning of the study. The posttest was used to measure growth after the instructional intervention. The control group was taught using the prescribed textbook course of study. In addition to the prescribed textbook course of study, the experimental group was taught six metacognitive strategies--main idea, sequence, cloze procedure, predicting outcomes, inference, and summarizing. Data from the hypothesis were tested with a I-test analysis, and the data revealed the following: 1. The gains in comprehension were not significant for either student group. 2. Although the scores between the two groups were not significantly different, the experimental group, who were taught the metacognitive strategies, reflected greater grade-level gains than the control group. From the findings the following suggestions are made: 1. Reading curriculums need to incorporate direct instruction of metacognitive strategies into their overall plan. 2. Evaluation standards need to be formulated to measure students' metacognitive growth. 3. A reading curriculum concentrating on teaching metacognitive strategies needs to be developed with various kinds of guided practice materials being the central focus. 4. Teacher training should emphasize the necessity of teacher effectiveness in directly influencing student achievement. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page v LIST OF TABLES ......................----.-...... LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONSo.......................--------viii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION .............................. Statement of the Problem Definition of Terms Purposes of the Study Hypothesis Background and Significance of the Problem Basic Assumptions Procedure for Collection of Data Procedure for Analyzing Data 2. REVIEW OF RELATED LiTERATURE.............. .. 25 History, Nature, and Development of Metacognition Reading Comprehension and Metacognition Research in Strategy Training Metacognition and its Implications for Instruction Summary 3. METHODS AND PROCEDURES..................... 59 Time Frame Teacher Selection Strategy Selection Instructional Materials Test Materials Instructional Procedures Procedure for Analyzing Data iii Chapter Page 4. ANALYSIS OF DATA..... ..... ... 75 5. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS0.. .. 0. .. .. .. .... 102 Summary Findings Other Findings Conclusions Educational Implications Recommendations APPENDICES: A. STUDENT LETTER, TEACHER LETTER, TEACHER TRAINING, AND TEACHER-MONITORING FORM a.....................---------........ 110 B. LESSON PLANS: 1ST SIX WEEKS GUIDED PRACTICE WORK SHEETS .0. .. .. .. .0. .0.0. .0. ... 117 C. LESSON PLANS FOR ENSUING SIX WEEKS .. .0.0.. .. .... 169 D. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT CONTROL GROUP ..0.0. ..... 213 E. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT EXPERIMENTAL GROUP.......................... .-. .... 218 BIBLIOGRAPHY. ....................... 221 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Second Semester Prescribed Course of Study 72 for the Control Student Group ......................... 2. A Comparative Analysis of Total Student Achievement on the Comprehension Section of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Level E, Form 1 Presented at 76 the Pretest ...................................... 3. Summary Statistics for Pretest Data Collected from Control Groups and the Experimental Groups on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading 77 Test Level E, Form 1 .............................. 4. A Comparative Analysis of Posttest Student Achievement on the Comprehension Section of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Level E, Form 1 Presented at the 78 Pretest ......................................... 5. Summary Statistics for the Posttest Data Collected from Control Groups and Experimental Groups on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Level E, Form 2 .............................. 79 6. A Comparative Analysis of Student Achievement on the Comprehension Section of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, Presented as the Gain Scores .......................... 80 7. Summary Statistics for Gain Scores Collected from Control Groups and Experimental Groups on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Level E...............................81 v Table Page 8. A Comparative Analysis of Teacher Effectiveness on Student Achievement on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Level E, Forms 1 and 2 and Gain Scores for Combined Groups .................... 84 9. Analysis of Teacher Effectiveness on Student Achievement on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Level E, Forms 1 and 2 and Gain Scores for Combined Groups...................85 10. Summary Statistics for Teacher Effectiveness on Overall Student Achievement Presented for Combined Groups ................................. 86 11. A Comparative Analysis of Achievement for Control Student Groups by Teacher ..................... 87 12. A Comparative Analysis of Achievement for Experimental Student Groups by Teacher.........................................88 13. Analysis of Variance of Teacher Effectiveness on Student Achievement ............................. 89 14. A Two-by-Two Statistical Analysis on Group and Teacher Data ................................. 90 15. Teacher 1 Treatment Group 1--Class Averages for Five Metacognitive Strategy Areas......... .......... 91 16. Teacher 1 Treatment Group 2--Class Averages for Five Metacognitive Strategy Areas ................... 93 17. Teacher 2 Treatment Group 1--Class Averages for Five Metacognitive Strategy Areas ................... 95 18. Teacher 2 Treatment Group 2--Class Averages for Five Metacognitive Strategy Areas ................... 97 19. Student Achievement--Control Group Teacher 1-- Class 1 and Class 2 ................................ 214 vi Table Page 20. Student Achievement--Control Group Teacher 1-- and Class 3................ .. .......... - - - - - - - -0-0-0-0-0-*-0. ......215 21. Student Achievement--Control Group Teacher 2-- Class 1 and Class 2. .. .0..0. a. ...... ...... .. -0 - -0- -*- -*- -- . .0.....216 22. Student Achievement--Control Group Teacher 2-- Class3.....................------------.. 217 23. Student Achievement--Experimental Group Teacher 1--Class 1 and Class 2........................219 24. Student Achievement--Experimental Group Teacher 2--Class 1 and Class 2....... .. ......... 220 vii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Page Figure 1. Graph of Control and Experimental Groups Pretest and Posttest Scores...........................82 viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY Learning to read is a complex mental process that involves interaction between the reader and the text for meaning to occur. Expert readers use rapid decoding, large vocabularies, phonemic awareness, knowledge about text features, and a variety of strategies to aid comprehension and memory (Baker & Brown, 1984). In addition, reading for meaning requires not only thinking, but also the development of definite cognitive strategies. One such strategy is metacognition, which is the knowledge and control that the readers have over their own thinking and learning activities. In the early 1970s John Flavell, Ann Brown, and others introduced the concept of metacognition to describe the ability to think about one's own thinking (Reynolds & Wade, 1986). Specifically, Flavell (1979) defines metacognition as an awareness of, and an ability to capitalize on, one's own knowledge and thought processes as applied to a specific task. As early as 1933, John Dewey emphasized that actual, knowledgeable learners understand how memory, thinking, and learning actually work. In so doing, the readers' attention is drawn to their awareness of and ability to monitor and control cognitive activities while engaged in reading, studying, and problem solving (Reynolds & Wade, 1986). 1 2 Knowledge about metacognition is an understanding of the variables that influence thinking as well as the ability to act on these variables. Herein lies the connection between the readers' cognitive abilities and their strategic reading skills. Strategic reading is a prime characteristic of expert readers because it is a part of children's cognitive development and is necessary for success in school. The Paris and Myers 1981 study (cited in Baker & Brown, 1984) categorized knowledge about strategic reading in three ways. First, there is declarative knowledge about