An investigation into learners’ attitudes towards training metacognitive strategies in reading comprehension

scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” 
Table 4.4. The drawbacks of teaching metacognitive strategies in reading comprehension 
The disadvantages that the learners could have are just at the level of uncertainty 
with the means between 2.6 and 3.4. (items C.2.12, C.2.13, C.2.14, C.2.15). The second 
drawback related to the complication of the instruction was agreed the most (M=3.30, 
SD=.942). Both items C.2.14 and C.2.15 did not receive a strong agreement from the 
respondents. However, the means of those items did not emphasize or refuse the 
drawbacks of the instruction. 
4.1.4. The learners’ reactions in response to the incorporation of metacognitive 
strategies in reading 
Table 4.5. Learners’ reactions to the incorporation of metacognitive strategies in reading 
Item N Min Max Mean 
Std. 
Deviation 
C.3.1 I pay close attention to metacognitive strategies 
instruction 
102 1 5 3.43 .839 
C.3.2 I actively engage in class activities related to 
reading comprehension with the help of 
metacognitive strategies 
102 2 5 3.41 .813 
C.3.3 I try to apply the metacognitive strategies instructed to 
understand the reading texts required 
102 3 5 3.78 .669 
C.3.4 I try to apply the metacognitive strategies 
instructed to understand new reading texts 
102 1 5 3.55 1.021 
C.3.5 I want to learn more metacognitive strategies in 
the future 
102 2 5 3.96 .730 
Table 4.5 reflects the learners’ reactions belonged to the aspect of behaviors. As the 
result, all the means of the items were higher than the standard value of uncertainty of 3.4. 
Based on the means, they could be divided into two groups. The first one included items 
C.3.1, C.3.2, C.3.4 with the means around 3.4, and many contrast opinions. The highest 
mean belonged to wanting to learn more metacognitive strategies in the future (item C.3.5, 
M=3.96, SD=.730). 
Item Drawbacks N Min Max Mean 
Std. 
Deviation 
C.2.12 I think metacognitive strategy instruction 
was so new, causing difficulty at the 
beginning since it. 
102 1 5 3.10 .960 
C.2.13 I think metacognitive strategy was 
complicated. 
102 1 5 3.30 .942 
C.2.14 I think metacognitive strategy instruction 
was time-consuming. 
102 1 4 2.53 .671 
C.2.15 I think metacognitive strategy instruction 
increased memory load. 
102 2 4 2.67 .708 
HCMUE Journal of Science Vol. 18, No. 2 (2021): 368-381 
378 
4.2. The difference of the attitudes of high-level and low level learners 
To investigate whether the difference in the attitudes of learners in low-level and 
high-level groups is significant, an Independent-sample T-test was conducted. The results 
is shown in Table 4.6. 
Table 4.6. Independent Sample T-test of different groups of learners 
Low-level 
(n=52) 
High level 
(n=50) t(102) p 
95%CI 
M SD M SD LL UL 
Affections 3.0 1.03 3.99 .72 -5.23 .000 -1.272 -.574 
Cognitions 3.08 .79 3.58 .65 -3.54 .000 -.79 -.22 
Behaviors 3.38 .61 3.88 .47 -4.62 .001 -.709 -.282 
According to Table 4.6, the sig. value of the Levene’s test of the affections group 
was lower than .05 (sig.=0.09), which allows us to assume the equal variances of it. 
However, the sig. values of the Levene’s test were respectively higher than .05, which led 
to the unequal variances assumption in cognition and behaviors. 
For the affections, there was a significant difference in the means of the low-level 
(M=3.07, SD=1.03) comparing to the high-level (M=3.99, SD=.716) with the two-tailed 
sig. value lower than the standard value (p=.000<.05). The mean difference of this group 
was identified the most significant one among the three factors. Similarly, in terms of 
cognitions and behaviors, the mean difference of the low-level and high-level was 
significant (p<.05). The values of the mean difference of the two factors above were about .05. 
To sum up, there was a significant difference between the attitudes of the low-level 
and high-level regarding the three factors, i.e. affections, cognitions and behaviors. 
5. Discussions 
The first research question seeks to investigate the attitudes of learners towards the 
metacognitive strategy instruction incorporated in reading lessons. The attitudes were 
evaluated in three components, i.e. affections, cognitions and behaviors. The statistics 
generally revealed that all the learners were aware of the importance of reading in their 
English learning. The equivalent percentage of respondents confirming the statement 
above agreed on the instruction of reading strategies to support reading learning. The 
participants mostly gave positive feelings towards the instruction they experienced, which 
lends support to previous research by Wichadee (2011) and Tavakoli and Koosha (2016). 
Firstly, in terms of affections, the results figure out the agreement on the interest, 
confidence and satisfaction the participants got from the instruction. In fact, not all the 
learners found the reading instruction interesting. Some opinions even stated that the 
instruction was boring and not appropriate with their learning with lots of tasks. The same 
negative opinions above can be found in the study of Wichadee (2011) from the group of 
low-proficiency in reading. Besides that, a large percentage of learners feel more confident 
in understanding texts with the support of metacognitive strategies as well as using 
strategies trained, which can be explained due to the reasonable training duration for the 
participants to get familiar with strategies taught. Most importantly, they were satisfied 
HCMUE Journal of Science Huynh Thi Hau 
379 
with the instruction, which is a profound base for deeper awareness of participants in the 
second factor, cognitions. 
Benefits and drawbacks were reflected clearly according to the data collected. The 
leaners mostly agreed on the benefits of the instruction. They were used to applying the 
strategies trained, which is in the support of the findings by Tavakoli and Koosha (2016). 
In the study, they found that the students’ self-efficacy improved significantly as a 
consequence of the strategy instruction. The favorite benefit noted was activating prior 
knowledge with a strong agreement. It can be explained that this strategy is simple and 
very practical for most learners to get familiar with metacognitive strategies. The next one, 
planning steps for reading, was highly recommended for its implications. However, the 
learners were uncertain to get benefits from the strategies in while-reading stage such as 
checking comprehension with or without new information, controlling concentration and 
double-checking comprehension with ambiguous information. They were likely to have 
some problems with the strategies related controlling comprehension. Most benefits all 
received a strong disagreement from the participants. It means there are some learners in a 
need of help to understand and get benefits form the strategies instructed. It was also 
reflected in the suggestions for clearer practical application sections. 
Regarding disadvantages, the learners were uncertain about the disadvantages of the 
instruction. The most reported issue was related to the difficult feelings at first of the 
instruction. It can be from the instructor and materials. In the qualitative data, it was 
suggested that the instructor should use reading texts with familiar topics first. 
In the third factor of behaviors, the learners largely agreed on paying close attention, 
actively engaging, applying texts required, applying new texts and expecting to learn more. 
The most expected reactions were wanting to learn more metacognitive strategies and 
applying those strategies to understand texts. This reflects the practical application of 
metacognitive strategies. 
However, the findings also show some negative feedback from the respondents, which can 
be analyzed deeply in the second research question related to the different attitudes of 
learners regarding their language proficiency. 
In the analysis of different attitudes of the learners at the high-level and low-level 
reading competence, the findings from the Independent Sample T-test was employed. The 
result showed that although both groups were aware of the importance of learning reading and 
teaching reading strategies to support learning. The high-level group had more positive 
feelings towards the instruction, which is consistent with the findings by Wichadee (2011), 
Zhang (2009) and Schunk and Zimmerman (1998). Particularly, the low-level and high-level, 
according to the statistics tests, were different in terms of all three aspects, i.e. affections, 
cognitions and behaviors. The difficulties the low-level group facing could be found in the 
qualitative data: the instruction is inappropriate, boring and abstract for application. In contrast, 
the high-level felt more confident with learning strategies. Despite the amount of time taken to 
follow the instruction, the high-level learners found it worth learning. 
HCMUE Journal of Science Vol. 18, No. 2 (2021): 368-381 
380 
6. Conclusions and implications 
The findings of the study reflected two main points. Firstly, the learners generally 
have positive attitudes towards the metacognitive strategy instruction incorporated in 
reading lessons through the CALLA model. However, the participants have some problems 
with the strategies related to controlling comprehension. Secondly, there are some 
differences in terms of affections, cognitions and behaviors between the low-level and 
high-level groups of learners in response to the metacognitive strategy instruction. 
The findings of the present study have implications for both teachers and learners. 
For teachers, it is recommended that metacognitive strategy instruction should be 
considered and modified to be more appropriate with the learners. Strategies need to be 
taught over a sufficient duration to be effective and should be presented over a number of 
contexts with a variety of texts to make sure that the learners will be able to use the 
strategies automatically. Moreover, teachers should have some deeper investigations into 
the learners’ favors and difficulties they are encountering. For learners, they should be get 
familiar with planning and self-evaluating steps in applying metacognitive strategies 
trained, which promotes metacognitive strategy application. 
❖ Conflict of Interest: Author has no conflict of interest to declare. 
REFERENCES 
Baker, C. (1992). Attitude and language. Clevedon: Mutilingual Matters. 
Carrell, P., Gajdusek, L. and Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Instructional 
Science, 26, 97–112. 
Chamot, A. (2005). Language learning strategy instruction: Current issues and research. Annual 
review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112-130. 
Dabarera, C., Renandya, W.A., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The impact of metacognitive scaffolding 
and monitoring on reading comprehension. System: An International Journal of 
Educational Technolog and Applied Linguistics, 42, 462-473. 
Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, 
administration and processing (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. 
Ellis, A., Delton, D. & Bond, J. (2014). An analysis of research on metacognitive teaching 
strategies. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4015 – 4024. 
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge: 
Cambridge Press. 
Israel, S. E. (2007). Using Metacognitive Assessments to Create Individualized Reading 
Instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 
Kara, A. (2009). The effect of a "Learning Theories" Unit on students' attitudes towards learning. 
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 100-113. 
HCMUE Journal of Science Huynh Thi Hau 
381 
Liu, J. (2009). A survey of EFL learners' attitudes toward information and communication 
technologies. English Langugae teching, 2(2), 101-106. 
McKenzie, R. M. (2010). The Social Psychology of English as a Global Language: Attitudes, 
Awareness and Identity in the Japanese Context. Dordrecht: Springer. 
O'Malley J. M., & Chamot A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. 
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
Paris, S. G., & Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension monitoring, memory, and study strategies of 
good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 13(1), 5–22. 
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively 
responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerrman, B. J. (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching. NY, New 
York: Guilford Press. 
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading 
strategies among native and nonnative readers. System, 29, 421-449. 
Tavakoli, H., & Koosha, M.,. (2016). The effect of explicit metacognitive strategy instruction on 
reading comprehension. PortaLinguarum, 25, 119-133. 
Wichadee, S. (2011). The effects of metacognitive strategy instruction on Thai students' reading 
comprehension ability. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 8(5), 31-40. 
doi:https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v8i5.4255 
Zhang, L. J. (2008). Constructivist pedagogy in strategic reading instruction: Exploring pathways 
to learner. Instructional Science, 36, 89-116. 
NGHIÊN CỨU THÁI ĐỘ CỦA NGƯỜI HỌC ĐỐI VỚI VIỆC GIẢNG DẠY 
CÁC CHIẾN LƯỢC SIÊU NHẬN THỨC TRONG ĐỌC HIỂU 
Huỳnh Thị Hậu 
Trường Đại học An ninh nhân dân, Việt Nam 
Tác giả liên hệ: Huỳnh Thị Hậu – Email: jennyhuynh2311993@gmail.com 
Ngày nhận bài: 08-10-2020; ngày nhận bài sửa: 11-12-2020; ngày duyệt đăng: 25-02-2021 
TÓM TẮT 
Việc giảng dạy các chiến lược siêu nhận thức nhằm nâng cao kĩ năng đọc hiểu tiếng Anh 
đã được tiến hành trên thế giới từ thập niên 90 của thế kỉ XX. Ở Việt Nam, những nghiên cứu về 
thái độ của người học đối với một mô hình cụ thể giảng dạy các chiến lược siêu nhận thức trong 
dạy đọc vẫn còn hạn chế. Nghiên cứu thái độ của người học góp phần vào thành công của việc 
giảng dạy các chiến lược siêu nhận thức. Công trình nghiên cứu này nhằm tìm hiểu thái độ của 
người học đối với việc kết hợp giảng dạy trực tiếp các chiến lược siêu nhận thức trong dạy đọc. 
Theo đó, phương pháp nghiên cứu mô tả theo hướng định lượng đã được áp dụng trên 102 học 
viên không chuyên Anh tại Trường Đại học An ninh nhân dân. Công cụ chính của công trình này là 
bảng khảo sát đã được kiểm tra độ tin cậy và độ chính xác. Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy việc vận 
dụng mô hình giảng dạy trực tiếp trong dạy chiến lược siêu nhận thức nhận được ý kiến tích cực từ 
người học; trong đó, có sự khác biệt về thái độ giữa nhóm người học có trình độ đọc thấp và cao. 
Từ khóa: chiến lược siêu nhận thức; đọc hiểu; giảng dạy trực tiếp; thái độ; người học