Metacognition in Reading: Reviewing the Literature

ABIDIN PAMMU, ZAINI AMIR, TG. NOR RIZAN TG. MOHD. MAASUM

ABSTRACT

This paper reviews the concepts of metacognition and its importance in reading strategies. Metacognition and reading strategies are two conceptions that need elaboration in order to conceptualize the understanding of the nature of conscious choice involving storage, recall and application. Metacognition has been widely revealed to play important roles in enhancing learners to be skilled readers. When learners are made aware of their metacognitive skills they will be able to reflect and describe what has happened. Metacognition is believed to encourage critical but healthy reflection and evaluation of thinking that may end up with positive changes in how learning is controlled. This paper also addresses the related theoretical issues that underlie the emergence of metacognitive strategies and the reading process and also informs how metacognition enhances better performance in the reading process. The important of reviewing the literature with regards to the needs of reading strategies as well as direction of interests in strategy work will be an issue in this paper. A resume of the importance of metacognition in the field of SLA and also its implication to the pedagogical development will also be an issue in this paper. Key words: metacognition, reading strategies, metacognitive reading strategies
INTRODUCTION

The prevalent use of metacognition in todays development of learning and education has marked an important contribution of cognitive psychology in the arena of language learning strategies. This development has also marked the shift of orientation from teacher-centeredness to more learner-based modes of instruction as a result of development in the research on learning strategy. This concept is based on the assumption that individuals differ in the way they approach leaning. It is important to be aware of such differences in learning and also recognize the existence of diversity in learner styles, cultures, and learner characteristics. This all have contributed to the development of research in metacognitive strategies on reading. While reading exists as a crucial skill in the process of self empowerment, there have been substantial findings

attributed to the roles of metacognition in the process of comprehension. To put it simply, metacognition enables learners to be productive and efficient learners.

The notion of strategy as an approach to learning has been around for about thirty-five years or so. The concept was brought up early in the literature of learning and strategy by Rubin (1975) in the second half of the twentieth century. It was during this time when learning strategy use had implication to the so-called good language learners. Learning strategy has ever since gained wider acceptance and popularity as an important means of making learning productive. Researchers and language teaching educators began to look at theoretical basis with which strategy could be incorporated within theory of cognitive skills. Expansion of the investigation of more prevalent issues on strategy was then initiated by Oxford (1990) who came up with classification of strategies. This trend has marked the shift from interest on teachers and methodology to more focus on learners and learning. It is a significant movement from teacher and learners goal oriented to learning approach to strategy oriented. This paper reviews the metacognitive strategies as an indirect strategy and reports what have been investigated in the reading strategy literature.

Learning strategies have recently been incorporated into cognitive theory and has been conceptualized as part of the cognitive skills. Theory of cognitive skills predisposes conscious attention for the practice of various tasks leading to fluent performance in language skills. This fluent performance must be made automatic in order to allow retrieval when performing a skill. According to cognitive psychologists, such as McLaughlin (1987), learning is a shift from controlled to automatic processing. What is implied is that devotion of conscious attention is necessary before automatic stage is reached. It is in the former state, the controlled stage where metacognition plays a part because learners will need to regulate and provide attention to her learning in order to gain new knowledge. Learning strategies in this part find its way in the theory of cognitive psychology because there is an instance of regulation of performance that involves mental representation.

Metacognition here can be seen as a process that enables the learner to make her mental representation become explicit in order to analyze knowledge effectively. Metacognition also enables the learner to have control over the higher level of analysis that often characterized in the form of reading in the target language. Because of the increasing linguistic demands contained in the reading, then the learners should perform better control in order to successfully enable her to reconstruct meaning from the text. This process clearly shows the relevance between metacognitive strategies and theories of learning advocated by Bialystok (1991) which has gained wider acceptance in the field of second language acquisition (SLA). There is no doubt that metacognition enables learners to be successful learners since it is associated with intelligence (Borkowski, Carr, & Presley 1987; Stenberg 1984, 1986a, 1986b).

DEFINITION OF METACOGNITION

Metacognition can be understood simply as thinking about thinking. It is the ability to reflect on what is known, and does not simply involve thinking back on an event, describing what happened, and the feeling associated with it (Anderson, 2005). He further argues that metacognition results in critical but healthy reflection and evaluation of thinking that may result in making specific changes in how learning is managed. According to Flavell (1976) In a

simplest form of conception, metacognition is defined as cognition about cognition or knowing about knowing which implies knowledge about when and how to use particular strategies for learning or for problem solving. In the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development, hypercognition referred to as self monitoring, self-representation and selfregulation processes which are regarded as integral components of human mind.

Despite prevalence use of metacognition, the term has also been recognized as a daunting term in educational psychology. Experts have even recognized the length and abstract nature of the term and provoked assertion as it is an intimidating concept. Human is believed to get engaged in the metacognition in their everyday activities. Jennifer (1997) refers metacognition to higher order of thinking which involves active control over the cognitive processes engaged in learning. Activities, such as planning how to approach a given learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating progress towards the completion of the task are the nature of the metacognition. Taking the critical roles the metacognition play into account, it is essential.

study metacognitive activity and development to determine how learners can be taught to better apply their cognitive resources through metacognitive management.

Despite its prevalent use in educational psychology, Tamsen (1996) asserted that there has been a controversy and debate over exactly what metacognition is. This has been due to the fact that several terms are currently in use to describe the same basic phenomenon, such as self-regulation executive control or an aspect of that phenomenon, such as meta-memory. This conception has been used interchangeably in the literature. While definition posits confused distinction, agreement can be made up to this stage if metacognition emphasizes the role of executive processes in the overseeing and regulation of cognitive processes. To trace back how the concept is derived in the literature, Flavell (1979) considered metacognition to consist of both metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation. The former refers to acquired knowledge about cognitive processes that can be employed to control cognitive processes.

It appears that different fields define metacognition in different ways. In general terms, it is referred to the study of memory-monitoring and self-regulation, meta-reasoning, consciousness / and auto-consciousness/self awareness (Dunlosky et al (2007). All of these are used to regulate ones own cognition in order to maximize his potential to think, learn and to evaluate. In the field of experimental psychology, metacognition is associated with monitoring that concerns with making judgment about the strengths of ones memories. This distinction was covered in a recent review of meta-memory research that focused on how findings from this domain can be applied to other areas of applied research (Dunlosky et. al (2007). On the contrary, metacognitive monitoring and control has been viewed as the function of the prefrontal cortex in the field of neuroscience (Dunlosky & Bjork, 2008). The notion of metacognition in much related to the study of second language learners and applied linguistics in general (Zhang, 2010). This notion is a consistent reflection deriving from Flavell (1979) where metacognition is elaborated within a tripartite theoretical framework that consist of metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive regulation and metacognitive strategies.

CATEGORIES OF METACOGNITION

Metacognition can be classified into three sub-categories that include metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive regulation and metacognitive experience. Flavel, (1978, 1987) further divides metacognitive knowledge into three sections to include knowledge of person variables, task variables and strategy variables. Proponents in cognitive psychology recognized the complexity of giving a conceptual framework of this daunting terminology. This term has penetrated into every corner of educational textbooks but presently generates confusion. Therefore, measures need to be taken in order to conceptualize this term within language learning strategies to prevent the presence of confusion in the literature. Categories of metacognition based on the above proponent can be seen in figure 1.

Figure 1 Component of Metacognition METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE

Metacognitive knowledge refers to general knowledge about how human beings learn and process information. In other words, it is about an individual knowledge of her own learning processes. This type of knowledge enables the learner to have proper choice of condition and situation with which to learn better. Metacognitive knowledge also includes task variables that concern knowledge about the nature of the task as well as the type of processing demands that will be placed upon the individual (Figure 2). Such knowledge enables the learner to understand the kind of reading that she understands better. Finally, knowledge about strategy variables that includes knowledge about both cognitive and metacognitive strategies as well as conditional knowledge about when and where appropriate to use such strategies. Figure 2 Components of Metacognitive KnowledgeSoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

METACOGNITIVE REGULATION Metacognitive regulation is the regulation of cognition and learning experiences through a set of activities that help people control their leaning. Livingston (1987) confirms that activities such as planning how to approach a given task, monitoring comprehension, and checking the progress regarding the completion of tasks are parts of the metacognitive regulation. Awareness raising regarding the metacognitive regulation is essential for learners to apply their metacognitive resources through metacognitive control. METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES Brown (1987) elaborates metacognitive strategies as sequential processes that one uses to control cognitive activities and to ensure that cognitive goal, such as whether understanding a text has been achieved. These processes help to regulate and oversee learning that accounts for planning and monitoring the cognitive activities as well as checking the outcomes of those activities. Such process can be reflected by way of checking the learners comprehension on reading a particular text and by questioning herself about the concept contained in the text. For example, when a learner has difficulty in comprehending, she may then goes back and reread the paragraph until comprehension is achieved. According to Brown (1987 the metacognitive strategy of selfquestioning is used to ensure that the cognitive goal of comprehension is met. Robert and Erdos (1993) posit a more directive distinction between cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Cognitive strategies are those to help an individual achieve a particular goal while metacognitive strategies are those that ensure whether the goal has been reached. Metacognitive experiences usually precede or follow a cognitive activity. They often occur when cognition fails if learner did not understand what was read. Such a case is believed to activate metacognitive processes as the learner attempts to rectify the situation. In addition, metacognitive and cognitive strategies may often overlap in the sense that the same strategy, such as questioning could be regarded as either cognitive or metacognitive strategy depending on the purpose of using the strategy. Because cognitive and metacognitive strategies are interrelated, these two concepts must be discussed together when addressing one of them. Thus, knowledge is considered to be metacognitive if it is actively used in a strategic manner to ensure that the goal has been achieved. Approach to the understanding of what constitutes as metacognition and cognition has been under the literature of cognitive psychology. Brown (1983) asserted that there had been

difficulties due to differences in opinion about what serves as metacognitive and cognitive strategy. These differences were assumed to arise from the issue of how the strategy functions, who use them, and what condition under which the strategies could be taught. It is essential therefore to provide what previous proponents had defined on these two issues. Brown et al (1983), for example, has conceptualized metacognition as knowledge about cognition. This knowledge of cognition may serve as employing thoughts for cognitive operation while regulation of cognition includes planning, monitoring and evaluating learning. Directed attention or consciously directing ones own attention to the learning tasks and self-evaluation or appraising the success and difficulties in the learning process include some example of metacognitive strategies. Cognitive strategies, by contrast, are often specific to distinct learning activities that include using operations or steps in learning which requires direct analysis, SoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

transformation or synthesis of learning materials (Brown & Palinscar 1982; Brown et al. 1983; Rigney 1978). Despite emergence of differences in these terminologies, there is a strong assumption that students without metacognitive strategies are regarded as learners without directions and ability to review their progress, accomplishments, and future learning directions (OMalley et al, 1985 cited in OMalley & Chamot, 1999). The concept of metacognition has been agreed to be central to the understanding of good language learners. Andersons (2005) model of metacognition to include preparing and planning for learning, evaluation of learning, selection and use of strategies, monitoring of learning, and orchestrating strategies has led us to believe how metacognition is central to productive learning. The idea is based on the assumption that it is the preparing and planning for the effective learning that activates the prior knowledge. All of these mentioned aspects contribute to the making of sound good language learners. Learners are considered good if they can develop metacognitive skills which enable them to manage their own learning, thereby rendering themselves less dependent on the learning situation. Anderson (2005) confirmed that good teachers could not possibly teach learners everything they need to know. Instead, good learning results depend entirely on learners being able to go beyond what teachers provide by means of developing the learners metacognitive behavior. Research done by Carrell (1983, 1984), and Carrell & Eisterhold (1983) demonstrated that reading comprehension can be enhanced when background knowledge is activated. The study includes background knowledge to consist of experiences brought by the learner to handle reading such as educational experiences, cultures, and knowledge about how first and second language works. Other important category of metacognition includes selection and the use of strategies. This category is based on the assumption that it is the selection of appropriate strategies and awareness is what distinguishes between good and poor language learner (Van & Abraham, 1990). The next important category is the monitoring of the learning as included in one characteristic of good language learner by Rubin (1975). The underlying assumption behind this belief is that good language learners are constantly aware whether learners understand something or not. Next, orchestrating strategy is also considered an important part of metacognition. This is due to the perception that a positive learning outcome may be attained through constant integration of strategy use when engaged in learning situation. The final category of metacognition is in reference to evaluation of learning. Based on this assumption,

good language learners must be able to evaluate the efficacy of what they are doing. Poor learners, on the other hand, often observed not to do self evaluation. Good language learners, according to research findings, are constantly making frequent use of a wide range of metacognitive strategies (OMalley & Chamot, 1990; Griffith 2003) as cited in Anderson (2005) in Griffith C. (2008). METACOGNITION AND COGNITIVE STRATEGY INSTRUCTION Strategy instruction has been an issue in the literature as a result of development in the learning strategy research. However, such an issue has also been recognized as an issue that constantly generates controversy as well as debate (Chamot, 2005). The emergence strategy instruction was generated by Rubin (1975)s provocation who revealed that strategies used by successful learners of languages could be taught to students who are struggling to learn a new language in order to make them better language learners. Despite enthusiastic development in the integrated models of instruction, such as CALLA (Cognitive Academic Language learning Approach), FORESEESoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

4C (Communication, Cognitive Academic Language Development, and Content Instruction in the Classroom), the effectiveness of strategy instruction has been questioned (Vann & Abraham, 1990). Findings from other research indicating effectiveness of strategy instruction under the right condition (Nunan, 1997; OMalley, 1987) compelled researches to have developed wellrecognized strategy instruction models, such as Chamot, Barnhardt, El-Dinary and Robins (1999) Cohen (1998) and Grenfell and Haris (1999) despite emergence of controversy. This controversy may compel researchers to undertake more investigations in order to obtain justifiable arguments for validating the effects of strategy instruction in the near future. Cognitive Strategy Instruction (CSI) is presently conceptualized as an instructional approach which emphasizes the development of thinking skills and processes as a means to enhance learning. To enable learners to become more strategic, self-reliant, flexible, and productive in their learning endeavors is one of the primary aims of the CSI (Scheid, 1993). According to Halpern (1996), CSI is based on the assumption that there are identifiable cognitive strategies that had been previously utilized by only the best and the brightest students which can be taught to most students. The use of these strategies has been associated with successful learning (Borkowski, Carr, & Pressley, 1987; Gardner, 1990). In other words, the transfer of strategy instruction is more or less as an attempt to reduce degree of learners dependency on external variables, thus encouraging learning autonomy. Despite insufficiency of information regarding the effects of strategy instruction so far, the issue of strategy instruction is about to embark on the future orientation of research strategy in both second and foreign language acquisition development Metacognition enables students to benefit from instruction and influences the use of maintenance of cognitive strategies (Carr, Kurtz, Scheneider, Turner & Borkowski 1989; Tamsen, 1996). The most effective approaches to metacognitive instruction is the one that can provide the learner with both knowledge of cognitive processes and strategies as well as experience or practice in using both cognitive and metacognitive strategies. However, as Lavingston (1996) has asserted that providing knowledge without experiences or vice versa is insufficient for the development of metacognitive control. Research works on metacognition not only provide insights for the development of pedagogy but also to educational psychologists regarding cognitive process involved in learning. There also seems to be positive implication of the metacognitive research on instructional aspects, such as teaching learners on how to be more aware of their learning

processes. Insights on how to regulate the processes for more effective learning have also been felt as the outcome of various investigations involving metacognitive studies. DEVELOPMENT OF RESEARCH IN METACOGNITIVE READING STRATEGY The development of research in language learning strategy particularly with regards to reading comprehension has marked the significant development of metacognitive investigation. However, direction of research investigation has been characterized by justification of the use of certain strategy over the range of target groups and range of institutions as well as modes of data collection. Reading strategy investigation has revealed the presence of metacognitive strategies used by learners as evident in the following successive research undertakings. There has been significant development of metacognitive research on reading in the last couple of years. Early study on the correlation between metacognition and reading was SoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

conducted by Barnett (1988) who investigated between strategy use and reading comprehension. Taking 278 students as the subject of the study they found that subjects who performed better in reading appeared to use better strategies as compared with subjects who did not use effective strategies. Metacognitive awareness was also found to correlate with the subject performance in reading comprehension. Investigation of the relationship between metacognitive awareness and reading comprehension in L1 and L2 had also been conducted. Despite earlier study revealed the positive correlation between level of metacognitive awareness and positive performance in the reading comprehension, Carrels (1989) investigation on the two groups of learners did not report any degree of significance on the effect of metacognitive awareness. Other study on metacognition and reading was conducted by Pressley and Afflerbach (1995) who investigated between metacognitive awareness and reading proficiency. Taking native speakers as sample of their investigation, they discovered that efficient readers were constructively responsive readers who employed strategies more effectively than inefficient readers. Several years passed, Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategy Inventory (MARSI) was designed by Mokhtari and Reichard (2002). This inventory had three broad categories that include Global Reading Strategies, Problem Solving Strategies and Support reading Strategies. This inventory was then later developed to gain other name as Survey of Reading Strategy (SORS) by Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002) was an expansion of MARSI. A more pleasant report regarding the roles of metacognitition in the literature of reading is the fact that proficient learners do employ metacognitive strategies in their reading activities. Research on learning strategy conducted in Malaysian context sixteen years ago revealed wider perspectives of metacognitive strategies. Using think-aloud protocol to collect data from both proficient and less proficient learners at University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) Radha Nambiar (2005) found that both types of learners employed metacognitive strategies in their reading of academic text. What is more specific about this study was the fact that learners regardless of their proficiency level employed metacognitive strategies in dealing with reading problems. It was concluded from this study that awareness raising could be an effective means of making the learners to be metacognitively aware in order to improver their reading performance. Other important study on metacognition had also been conducted with Yemeni students in 2006. This study focused on the effect of direct reading strategy instruction on metacognitive strategy awareness of eleven grade students in Yemen. To find out how effective is the direct

reading strategy instruction on the metacognitive awareness, two groups that is the experimental and the control group was employed. It was reported from the study that the experimental group performed better in the post test than in their previous test. Significant improvement was also apparent with regards to metacognitive knowledge where the experimental group improved in their awareness of reading strategies. Overall, there was a very significant improvement in terms of learners attitudes to reading comprehension. A much recent research on metacognitive strategies was conducted by Aegpongpaow (2008) who investigated Thai students in their English academic reading. Using qualitative method, his study came up with the findings that students of Thai had awareness and control of their metacognitive strategies in their reading process. It was reported that the students used metacognitive reading strategies to plan, monitor, and remediate their comprehension such as scanning the text, paying attention to the main points, and focusing on the key words. It was also found from this study that participants with high English reading proficiency employed metacognitive strategies more often than with low reading proficiency students. It is interesting SoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

to bear in mind that despite possession of high proficiency in reading, the Thai learners appeared to encounter enormous problem in their reading of English, such as vocabulary and grammatical problems. SIGNIFICANCE OF METACOGNITIVE STRATEGY ON READING ENHANCEMENT It is apparent from the literature of metacognitive studies to associate the metacognition with positive reading outcomes. Empowerment itself is a crucial dimension that needs to be encouraged in order to make learner achieve the learning goals more easily. As learners can reflect upon their learning, they become better prepared to make conscious decisions about what they can do to improve their learning (OMalley & Chamot, 1990). The importance of metacognitive dimension in language learning especially in the enhancement of reading skills has been based on the evidence of low proficiency learners who become high reading achievers (Aegpongpao, 2008). To put it simply, these learners lack the knowledge of their own cognitive process to manipulate and regulate their reading activities. Anderson (1984) links proficiency in a foreign language with reading proficiency. This implies that reflection of learners own learning behavior that includes preparing, planning and monitoring is an integral part of reading strategy that need to be encouraged. In other words, strategic knowledge and own awareness of comprehension process is a gateway to reading empowerment. Other researchers, such as Auerbach and Paxton (1997) have claimed if metacognitive awareness that includes planning and consciously executing appropriate actions to achieve goal as crucial elements of proficient and strategic reading. Awareness of the importance of metacognitive strategies in reading increases along with the increasing interests of research on reading. Brown (1980) has confirmed the important role of metacognition can be linked to the expertise of learning in different domains. While metacognitive strategies have been seen as crucial in improving reading skills, cognitive strategies have been found to be effective in improving students comprehension. (Brown, 1981; Baker and Brown 1984; Palinscar and Brown 1984,1985). Having reviewed the importance of metacognition in the field of reading, investigation on wider aspects of learners may dominate the nature of research on metacognition in several years to come. Overall, metacognitive strategies appear to be vital in an attempt to provide measures of literacy skill which has been in great demand in current changing society. CONCLUSION

The current review of literature about metacognitive strategies indicates that regardless of their language background, learners employ metacognitive strategies in their language learning. It is also apparent that becoming metacognitively aware of learning situation not only improves performance but also generate empowerment. Empowerment itself is generated through learners reflection of their own learning. This reflection will encourage conscious decisions for making appropriate choice of strategies in order to improve comprehension. As metacognitive awareness appears to be an effective device in making reading more effective, it will gain stronger emphasis for it to be incorporated into the pedagogical implication. Among of the many positive implications may be that strategy instruction will be perceived to be an integral part of future orientation of EFL/ESL teaching and learning. The future direction of research interest in metacognitive strategies may look into the diversity of learner groups and on various skills, such as speaking and listening. Research SoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

instruments with regards to verbal reports may be strongly validated with the increasing interests of research in the field of metacognition. New modes of data collection techniques such as introspection will characterize the future investigation. The future research methodology will be more convincingly justified as more and more research on metacognitive strategies will be conducted in various contexts. Finally, cultural context will be considered in the future investigation of reading strategies. REFERENCES Aegpongpao, O. (2008). A qualitative investigation of metacognitive strategies in Thais students academic reading. An unpublished thesis. Srinakharinwirot University. Auerbach, E. & Paxton, D. (1997). It is not the English thing: Bringing reading research into the ESL classroom, TESOL Quarterly 31, 237-261. Anderson, N.J. (2005). Metacognition and good language learners. In Griffiths, C. (eds.) 2008. Lessons from Good Language Learners. Cambridge University Press. Brown, A.L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanism. In F.E. Weinert & R.H. Kluwe (eds.) Metacognition, motivation, and understanding Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum (pp.65-116). Carrell, P.L. & Eisterhold, J.C.(1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 553-573. Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies in Learning and Using a second Language. London. Longman. Flavell, J.H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitve monitoring. A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. In Lavingston J (1996). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved December 2010 from http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/metacog.htm. Flavell, J.H. (1987). Speculation about the nature and development of metacognition. In Lavingston J (1996). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved March 2010 http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/metacog.htm. Garner, R. (1990). When children & adults do not use learning strategies. Towards a theory of settings. In Lavingston, J.A. 1996. Effects of metacognitive instruction on strategy use of college students. Griffiths, C. (2008). Lessons from Good Language Learners. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Lavingston, J.A. (1996). Effects of metacognitive instruction on strategy use of college students. Unpublished manuscripts, State University of New York, Buffalo. McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London. Edward

Arnold.SoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

Nasser Omer, M. al Tamimi. 2006. The effect direct reading strategy instruction on students reading comprehension, metacognitive strategy awareness, and reading attitudes among eleven grade students in Yemen. An unpublished Ph.D.dissertation. Universiti Sains Malaysia. Malaysia. Nunan, D. (1997). Does learner strategy training make a difference? Lenguas Modernas, 24, 123-142. Mokhtari, K. & Reichard, C. (2002). Assessing students metacognitive awareness of reading skills. Journal of educational psychology, 94 (2), 249-259. OMalley, J.M. & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Pressley, M. & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols in reading. The nature of constructively responsive reading. Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J. Radha Nambiar. (2005). Language Learning and Language Use Strategies of Tertiary Learners for Academic Literacy: Towards a Theoretical and Pedagogical Model of Language Processing. Ph.D. Dissertation. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Bangi. Robert, M.J., & Erdos, G. (1993). Strategy selection and metacognition. Educational Psychology. 13, 259-266. Rubin, J. (1975). What the good language learner can teach us? Cited in Anderson (2002). Metacognition and good language learners. In Griffiths, C. (eds.) (2008). Lesson from good Language Learners. Cambridge University Press. Stenberg, R.J. (1984). What should intelligence tests test? Implications for a triarchic theory of intelligence for intelligence testing. In Lavingston J (1996). Metacognition: An overview. http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/metacog.htm. Stenberg, R.J. (1986a). Inside intelligence in Lavingston J. (1996). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved November 2010 from http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/metacog.htm Stenberg, R.J. (1986b). Intelligence applied. In Lavingston J. (1996). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved May 2009 http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/metacog.htm. Scheid, K. (1993). Helping students become strategic learners. Guidelines for teaching. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books. In Lavingston, J.A.(1997). Metacognition: An overview.

Van Zile-Tamsen, C.M. (1996). Metacognitive self-regulation and the daily academic activities of college students. Unpublished doctoral dissertations. State University of New York at Buffalo. In Lavingston J (1996). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved April 2009 from http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/metacog.htm.SoLLs.INTEC 2011 Proceedings

Vann, R. & Abraham, R. (1990). Strategies of Unsuccessful Language Learners. TESOL Quarterly. Cited in Chamot (2005). Strategy instruction and good language learners. Zhang, L.J. (2010). A dynamic metacognitive system account of Chinese university students knowledge about EFL reading. TESOL Quarterly, (4). Retrieved June 2011 from http://www.ingenaconnect.com/content/tesol/tq/00000044/00000002/art00006)44 320-353. Abidin Pammu, Zaini Amir, Tg Nor Rizan Tg Mohd Maasum Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia abidinpammu@yahoo.co.id1 (2)