Mc. Keown and Beck (2009) defined reading as “a complex mental process with various interacting sub processes" (p. 8). Thus, there is a cognitive process and further processes taking place in students’ mind when they are engaged in reading. This concept of reading highlights both cognitive and metacognitive functions of reading and the complexity of reading process.
This conclusion is in line with Williams and Atkins’ (2009) viewpoint on the role of metacognitive and cognitive strategies in reading comprehension. The two authors indicated that
28
these two specific strategies play a pivotal role in boosting students’ reading performance.
Another viewpoint of these cognitive processes is proposed by Mikulecky (2008). The author claimed that these cognitive processes can be defined as reading skills that readers employ to comprehend the text.
There have been many findings from research indicating there is a significant relationship between learning strategies and students’ language learning. An in-depth analysis of the profile of good language learners has documented prominent qualities of this profile. Good language learners can have better choice of language strategies, use strategies appropriately, and show a higher frequency of strategy use compared to low-performance learners. The aim of this chapter is to pinpoint the particular strategies that make great contributions to students’ performance drawing from previous literature.
As learners possess the skills in orchestrating the ways they learn, they are bound to achieve higher performance in second language learning and able to transfer that skills into other contexts. Wong and Nunan (2011) suggested that as learners possess the skills in learning-how- to-learn they can transfer good use of strategy into learning context outside the classroom.
Meanwhile, Cohen (2011) argued that students may encounter and employ a number of strategies in their second language learning but metacognitive strategies are the most important ones. This conclusion is aligned with Chamot’s viewpoint of metacognitive strategies:
“All learners can profit from learning how to use metacognitive strategies to plan, monitor, and evaluate themselves throughout their learning efforts"
(Chamot, 2014, p.18)
Findings from previous research have thrown light on the relationship between two particular kinds of strategies, metacognitive and cognitive strategies, and students’ performance.
Findings from Lai’s (2009) study in Taiwan noted that high performance students show a high frequency of using cognitive and metacognitive strategies while low performance students tend to use more social and memory strategies. In the context of metacognitive strategies, one of the main findings is that planning and monitoring are used frequently by more proficient learners.
Hence, the researcher concluded that students’ level is related to the strategies they choose. In a similar vein, Liu and Chen (2014) shared the same conclusion that the frequency of strategy use is related to learners' anxiety in language learning. The conclusion was drawn from their study in Taiwanese contexts with the participation of 212 fifth- and sixth-grade students. Liu and Chen
29
(2014) stated that students’ level of anxiety has a significant relationship with the choice of strategies to ease the difficulties in learning. Metacognitive strategies were at the highest frequency for students in mid-anxiety level. As for high-anxiety students, affecting strategies were most often used.
In the field of second language reading, Graham (1997) noted that the main strategies which are employed by effective students are metacognitive strategies. The author reported that these specific metacognitive strategies which are widely used by effective students such as double-check monitoring, comprehension monitoring, problem identifications, and substitution, resourcing and interpretation while weak students use " selective attention, strategy monitoring, translation, transfer, word analysis (looking for a word's meaning by breaking it down into parts), narrow focus, sentence analysis, and omission (Gragam, 1997, p. 54). Likewise, Zare-ee (2007) conducted a study to examine the relationship between students' use of metacognitive and cognitive strategies and their reading performance in Iranian context. Results from the study indicated that metacognitive strategies have a significant relationship with students' performance.
Hence, students’ use metacognitive strategies can significantly increase students’ achievement in reading.
The investigations so far into the profiles of poor learners have revealed the challenges that the learners need to overcome and the good lessons drawn from good second language learners to help them overcome such challenges. In terms of L2 reading, Klinger, Vaughn and Boardman (2007) indicated that poor readers tend to lack motivation, efficient metacognitive strategies, poor vocabulary, and pre-knowledge of the topics of reading texts. As the authors have not clearly confirmed the role of metacognitive strategies, further research specialized in this field to strengthen this relationship so as to increase students’ performance, especially the relationship between metacognitive strategies and students’ reading performance is vital.
Investigations into profiles of good students in this theme are beneficial to the poor learners.
Chamot (2008) pointed out that good language learners have a more profound metacognitive knowledge about their thoughts and the ways they learn. In addition, compared to low- performance students, good language learners understand the requirements of the tasks better and know the best to orchestrate their learning strategies to gain high achievements.
To sum up, the brief reviews of previous research have concluded that both metacognitive and cognitive strategies contribute significantly to students’ performance
30
(Veenman, Van Hout –Wolters, and Afflerbach, 2006). This thesis is then set to examine this relationship with a study integrated a strategy training course.