非英语专业学生英语阅读策略元认知意识研究
|
摘要
近年来,二语阅读领域的研究重心从研究学习者阅读策略的使用转移到研究元认知在阅读理解中的作用。在这一方面,研究者着重于研究读者在阅读过程中对阅读策略的意识程度即研究读者的元认知意识。对读者的元认知意识研究能帮助教师和研究人员更好地理解学习者的阅读理解过程,包括学习者对使用策略的识别以及他们是在什么情况下、如何使用策略的。尽管国外在这领域做了大量的研究,但对中国英语读者的元认知意识研究却很少,在国内也是如此。
因此,当前的研究目的是调查中国非英语专业大学生在阅读英语学术类材料时的阅读策略元认知意识。本研究尝试完成以下四个研究任务:确认学生所报告使用阅读策略的类型和频率,检测不同性别和高低英语水平读者的元认知意识差异,以及揭示阅读策略的使用与英语水平之间的内在关系。来自江西师范大学的230名非英语专业二年级学生参加了此项调查。他们按要求填写了Mokhtari & Sheorey (2002)设计的SORS阅读策略问卷,报告了他们所使用的阅读策略和CET4成绩。然后将所有的数据输入SPSS 17.0并进行描述性、独立样本t检验及相关性数据分析。
研究结果发现:第一,学生在总体阅读策略使用上处于中等水平;第二,在三大策略类型中,学生最喜欢使用的是问题解决性策略,其次是全球性策略和支持性策略;第三,女生的总体策略使用意识略高于男生,但策略使用意识显著比男生高的只表现在四个策略和全球性策略类上;第四,高水平的阅读者在总体阅读策略以及三大类策略使用上都明显高于低水平读者;最后,研究结果显示学生的策略使用与他们的语言水平密切相关。
根据以上的几点发现,下面给出的几点建议或许能给教师和教育工作者一些启示以帮助学习者提高策略的使用意识。首先,提高学生阅读策略的元认知意识和策略使用的能力对培养高效能的读者起到至关重要的作用。鉴于此,英语教师应将阅读策略的训练融入到课堂教学中,引导学生在实际阅读中运用不同的策略。其次,改变教师和学生在教学中的传统角色有利于培养独立自主的学习者,成为积极、高效率的读者。第三,对于教师来说认识到学生的个体差异如性别、语言水平的差异以便因材施教、取长补短,这点很重要。第四,鉴于策略使用与语言水平间的密切联系,可以通过指导学生经常使用有效策略来提高语言水平,反过来语言水平的提高会促进学生更加频繁的使用这些有效的策略。总之,提高学生的策略意识和实际运用策略的频率是提高阅读能力和语言水平的前提。
In recent years, research in second language reading has been transferred from the focus on learners’strategy use to focus on the role of metacognition in reading comprehension. In this field, researchers are examining readers' awareness of strategies during the reading process - their metacognitive awareness. Studies on readers’metacognitive awareness provide teachers and researchers a better understanding of readers’comprehension process, including identifying the strategies they use and how and under what conditions they use those strategies. Despite a vast body of research in this area abroad, there are only a few investigations on metacognitive awareness of Chinese English readers. Also, in China, quite few studies conducted on readers’metacognitive awareness of reading strategies.
Therefore, the present study aims to investigate non-English majors’metacognitive awareness about the use of reading strategies when reading academic materials. This research attempts to fulfill the following four tasks: to identify the type and frequency of perceived use of reading strategies students apply in reading tasks, to examine whether gender and proficiency will affect students’metacognitive awareness about reading strategies, and to discover the internal relationship between perceived reading strategies use and English proficiency. 230 second-year non-English major students in JiangXi Normal University participated in the investigation. They were asked to report the reading strategies they used and English proficiency by completing a questionnaire containing Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) designed by Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002). Then all the data were inputted into the computer and analyzed by SPSS 17.0. Descriptive and independent sample t-test and correlational analysis have been carried out.
The main findings are as follows: First, the participants show a medium awareness of the reading strategies. Second, among the three broad categories of reading strategies, students display a clear preference for Problem Solving Strategies, followed by Global Reading Strategies and Support Reading Strategies. Third, females show slight higher awareness in overall strategy use, but significant greater awareness only in four individual strategies and one Global Reading Strategy category than males. Fourth, the high-English-proficiency students show higher reported usage for overall reading strategies and all the three sub-categories than low-English-proficiency students. Finally, the results indicate there is a significant correlation between students' reported strategy use and their English proficiency.
In the light of the above findings, the following suggestions might provide teachers and educators with pedagogical implications for helping readers increase their awareness and use of reading strategies. First, increasing students’metacognitive awareness of reading strategies and improve their ability of strategy use play a vital role in helping students become competent readers. In view of this, L2 teachers in classroom should integrate reading strategy training into reading instructions and guide them to use different strategies in real reading situation. Second, changing teachers and learners’traditional roles played in teaching and learning is helpful to cultivate independent learners, to develop active and efficient readers. Furthermore, it is important for teachers to recognize individual differences like gender and proficiency differences so as to treat different students differently. Fourthly, based on the close correlation between strategy use and English proficiency, teachers should help their students improve language proficiency by encouraging them to make frequent use of effective strategies, which in turn would make students use these strategies more frequently. In all, increasing students’awareness of strategies and frequency of actual usage of reading strategies are the prerequisites of higher reading performance and language proficiency.
因此,当前的研究目的是调查中国非英语专业大学生在阅读英语学术类材料时的阅读策略元认知意识。本研究尝试完成以下四个研究任务:确认学生所报告使用阅读策略的类型和频率,检测不同性别和高低英语水平读者的元认知意识差异,以及揭示阅读策略的使用与英语水平之间的内在关系。来自江西师范大学的230名非英语专业二年级学生参加了此项调查。他们按要求填写了Mokhtari & Sheorey (2002)设计的SORS阅读策略问卷,报告了他们所使用的阅读策略和CET4成绩。然后将所有的数据输入SPSS 17.0并进行描述性、独立样本t检验及相关性数据分析。
研究结果发现:第一,学生在总体阅读策略使用上处于中等水平;第二,在三大策略类型中,学生最喜欢使用的是问题解决性策略,其次是全球性策略和支持性策略;第三,女生的总体策略使用意识略高于男生,但策略使用意识显著比男生高的只表现在四个策略和全球性策略类上;第四,高水平的阅读者在总体阅读策略以及三大类策略使用上都明显高于低水平读者;最后,研究结果显示学生的策略使用与他们的语言水平密切相关。
根据以上的几点发现,下面给出的几点建议或许能给教师和教育工作者一些启示以帮助学习者提高策略的使用意识。首先,提高学生阅读策略的元认知意识和策略使用的能力对培养高效能的读者起到至关重要的作用。鉴于此,英语教师应将阅读策略的训练融入到课堂教学中,引导学生在实际阅读中运用不同的策略。其次,改变教师和学生在教学中的传统角色有利于培养独立自主的学习者,成为积极、高效率的读者。第三,对于教师来说认识到学生的个体差异如性别、语言水平的差异以便因材施教、取长补短,这点很重要。第四,鉴于策略使用与语言水平间的密切联系,可以通过指导学生经常使用有效策略来提高语言水平,反过来语言水平的提高会促进学生更加频繁的使用这些有效的策略。总之,提高学生的策略意识和实际运用策略的频率是提高阅读能力和语言水平的前提。
In recent years, research in second language reading has been transferred from the focus on learners’strategy use to focus on the role of metacognition in reading comprehension. In this field, researchers are examining readers' awareness of strategies during the reading process - their metacognitive awareness. Studies on readers’metacognitive awareness provide teachers and researchers a better understanding of readers’comprehension process, including identifying the strategies they use and how and under what conditions they use those strategies. Despite a vast body of research in this area abroad, there are only a few investigations on metacognitive awareness of Chinese English readers. Also, in China, quite few studies conducted on readers’metacognitive awareness of reading strategies.
Therefore, the present study aims to investigate non-English majors’metacognitive awareness about the use of reading strategies when reading academic materials. This research attempts to fulfill the following four tasks: to identify the type and frequency of perceived use of reading strategies students apply in reading tasks, to examine whether gender and proficiency will affect students’metacognitive awareness about reading strategies, and to discover the internal relationship between perceived reading strategies use and English proficiency. 230 second-year non-English major students in JiangXi Normal University participated in the investigation. They were asked to report the reading strategies they used and English proficiency by completing a questionnaire containing Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) designed by Mokhtari and Sheorey (2002). Then all the data were inputted into the computer and analyzed by SPSS 17.0. Descriptive and independent sample t-test and correlational analysis have been carried out.
The main findings are as follows: First, the participants show a medium awareness of the reading strategies. Second, among the three broad categories of reading strategies, students display a clear preference for Problem Solving Strategies, followed by Global Reading Strategies and Support Reading Strategies. Third, females show slight higher awareness in overall strategy use, but significant greater awareness only in four individual strategies and one Global Reading Strategy category than males. Fourth, the high-English-proficiency students show higher reported usage for overall reading strategies and all the three sub-categories than low-English-proficiency students. Finally, the results indicate there is a significant correlation between students' reported strategy use and their English proficiency.
In the light of the above findings, the following suggestions might provide teachers and educators with pedagogical implications for helping readers increase their awareness and use of reading strategies. First, increasing students’metacognitive awareness of reading strategies and improve their ability of strategy use play a vital role in helping students become competent readers. In view of this, L2 teachers in classroom should integrate reading strategy training into reading instructions and guide them to use different strategies in real reading situation. Second, changing teachers and learners’traditional roles played in teaching and learning is helpful to cultivate independent learners, to develop active and efficient readers. Furthermore, it is important for teachers to recognize individual differences like gender and proficiency differences so as to treat different students differently. Fourthly, based on the close correlation between strategy use and English proficiency, teachers should help their students improve language proficiency by encouraging them to make frequent use of effective strategies, which in turn would make students use these strategies more frequently. In all, increasing students’awareness of strategies and frequency of actual usage of reading strategies are the prerequisites of higher reading performance and language proficiency.
引文
Adams, Marilyn J., and Allan Collins. 1979. A schema-theoretic view of reading. In New directions in discourse processing, Roy O. Freedle (Ed.),1-22. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Afflerbach, P.P., & Johnston, P.H. (1986). What do expert readers do when the main idea is not explicit? In J.F. Baumann (Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension (pp. 49-72). Newark International Reading Association.
Alderson, J., 1984. Reading in a foreign language: a reading problem or a language problem? In: Alderson, C., Urquhart, X. (Eds.), Reading in a Foreign Language. Longman, New York, pp. 1–24.
Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson,&R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vo1.3, pp.285-310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, Richard C., Ralph E. Reynolds, Diane L. Schallert, and Ernest T.Goetz. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal 14(4): 367-381.
Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), The handbook of reading research (pp. 255-292). New York: Longman.
Anderson, N.J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal 75: 460–472.
Anderson, N. J. 1999. Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies .Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Bacon, S. M. "The relationship between gender, comprehension, processing strategies, and cognitive and affective response in foreign language listening". Modern Language Journal, 76(1992), 160-178.
Baker, L.Brown, A. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of Reading Research. (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
Barnett, M. (1988). Reading through context: How real and perceived strategy use affects L2 Comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 72, 150-162.
Bartlett, Frederic C. 1932. Remembering: a study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bauman, J. (1982) Linguistic Structur and the Validity of Reading Comprehension Tests (FinalReport.G-80–0149).Washington,DC: National Institute of Education (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 218 950).
Baumann, J.F., Jones, L.A., & Seifert-Kessell, N. (1993). Using think alouds to enhance children's comprehension monitoring abilities. The Reading Teacher, 47(3), 184-193.
Benedetto, R. (1984). A psycholinguistic investigation of the top-level organization strategies in first and second language reading: Five case studies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University.
Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 463-494.
Block, E. L. (1992). See how they read: Comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. Quarterly, 26, 319-343.
Brantmeier, C. (2003). Does gender make a difference? Passage content and comprehension in second language reading. Reading in a Foreign Language Volume 15, Number 1, ISSN 1539-0578.
Brown, A. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem ofmetacognition. Hillsdale, NJ: In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology. 77-165. Erlbaum
Brown, A., Armbruster, B. and Baker, L. (1983). The role of metacognition in reading and studying . In J. Orsany (Ed.) Reading comprehension: From research to practice. (pp. 49-75). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaun.
Brown, H.D. (1987). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Prentice-Hall.
Carrell, Patricia L. 1983b. Some issues in studying the role of schemata, or background knowledge, in second language comprehension. Paper presented at the 17th Annual TESOL Convention, Toronto, Canada, March,1983.
Carrell, Devine, & Eskey, (1988), Interactive text processing: Implications for ESL/ second language reading classrooms. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 239-259). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. Modern Lauguage jourual, 73, 121-134.
Casanave, Christine P.“Comprehension Monitoring in ESL Reading: A Neglected Essential.”TESOL Quarterly 22 (1988): 283-302.
Clark,(1975) CLARK, HERBERT. Comprehension as an art. Paper read at the Psychology Symposium, Indiana University.
Clarke, M. A. (1979). Reading in Spanish and English: Evidence from adult ESL students. Language Learning, 29, 121-150.
Clarke, M. A. (1980). The short circuit hypothesis of ESL reading-or when language competence interferes with reading performance. Modern Language Journal, 27, 135-154.
Coady, J. (1979). A psycholinguistic model of the ESL reader. In R. Mackay, B. Barkman, & R. R. Jordon (Eds.), Reading in a second language: Hypotheses, organization, and practice (pp. 5-12). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Cohen, A. D. (1990). Language learning: insight for learners, teachers, and researchers. NewYork: Ness burv House Publishers.
Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of language proficiency: Implications for bilingual education and the optimal age issue. TESOL Quarterly, 14, 175-187.
Cziko, G., 1978. Differences in first and second language reading: the use of syntactic, semantic, and discourse constraints. Canadian Modern Language Review 34, 473–489.
Cziko, G. A. (1980). Language competence and reading strategies: A comparison offirst-and second-language oral reading errors. Language Learning, 30, 101-114.
David Pearson (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research 61 (2): 239–264.
Devine, Joanne (1984). "ESL Readers' Internalized Models of the Reading Process." On TESOL '83. Ed. Jean Handscombe, Richard Orem & Barry Taylor. Washington: TESOL, 95-108.
Devine, J., 1993. The role of metacognition in second language reading and writing. In: Carson, J., Leki, I. (Eds.), Reading in the Composition Classroom: Second Language Perspectives. Heinle and Heinle, Boston.
Ehrman, M. & R, Oxford. (1989). Effects of gender differences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies. Modern Language Journal, 73(1), 1-13.
Ehrman, M.E., and Oxford, R. (1995). Cognition plus: correlates of language learning success. The Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 67-89.
Ericsson, K., & Simon, H.J. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215- 251.
Flavell, J. H. 1976. Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 231-236.
Flavell, J.H. (1978). Metacognitive development. In J.M. Scandura & C.J. Brainerd, eds., Structural/Process theories of Complex Human Behaviour (pp. 213–245). The Netherlands: Sijthoff and Noordhoff.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation and Understanding (pp. 21-29). Hillside, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Garner, R., & Krauss, K. (1982). Good and poor comprehender differences in knowing and regulating reading behaviors. Educational Research Quarterly, 6, 5-12.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Goodman, K.S. 1970. Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In R. B.
Ruddell&H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 259-271.
Goodman, K. (1973). Psycholinguistic universals in the reading process. In F. Smith (Ed.), Psycholinguistics and reading (pp. 21-27). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406.
Green, J and Oxford, R "A Closer Look at Learning strategies, L2 Proficiency, and Gender" TESOL Quarterly (29) 1995: 261-297.
Guthrie, J., & Wigfield, A. (1999). How motivation fits into a science of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 199-205.
Harris, P. L., Kruithof, A., Meerum Terwogt, M.,&Visser, T. (1981). Children's detection and awareness of textual anomaly. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31(6), 212-230.
Hauptman, Philip C. "A Comparison of First and Second Language Reading Strategies among English- speaking University Students." Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 4 (1979): 173-201.
Hosenfeld, C. (1977). A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of successful and nonsuccessful second language learners. System 5, 110-123.
Hudson, T. (1982). The effects of induced schemata on the“short-circuit”in L2 reading performance. Language Learning, 32, 1-30.
Jacobs, J. E.,&Paris, S. Cz (1987). Children's metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22, 255-278.
Kluwe, R. (1982). Cognitive lnowledge and executive control: Metacognition. In D. RGriffin (Ed.), Animal mind-human mind (pp. 201-224). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Knight, Stephanie L. (1985). Yolanda Padron & Hersholt C. Waxman. "The Cognitive Reading Strategies of ESL Students." TESOL Quarterly 19, 789-92.
Knight, S., Padron, Y. and Waxman, H.C.. (1985). The cognitive reading strategies ofESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 789-792.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Macnamara, J. (1970). Comparative studies of reading and problem solving in two languages. TESOL Quarterly, 4, 107-116.
Miller,1963; A. Language and communicacation. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.
Molhtari, K.,& Reichard, C. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32 (3), 379-394.
Myers, M., & Paris, S. (1978). Children’s metacognitive knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 680-690.
Nyikos, M. (1990). Gender-related differences in adult language learning: Socialization and memory factors. Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 273-287.
Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1989).Research on Language learning strategies: methods, language findings, and instructional issues. Modernal Language Journal, 73.
Oxford R.L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know. Boston: Newsburv House.
Oxford, R., et al. (1993). "Gender differences in second/ foreign language learning styles and strategies". In Exploringgender Ed. J. Sutherland. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Oxford, R. (1994). Language learning strategies: An Update. [verified 7 Feb 2005] http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/oxford01.html.
O'Malley, M. J.,&Chamot, A刀.(2001). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at gender and strategy use in L2 reading. Language Learning 53:4, 649-702.
Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitivestrategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing, 20(1), 26-56.
Pressley, M., Snyder, B. & Cariglia-Bull, B. (1987). How can good strategy use be taught to children? Evaluation of six alternative approaches. In S. Cormier & J. Hagman, eds., Transfer of Learning: Contemporary Research and Application (pp. 81–120). Orlando, FL: Academic Press
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson,&R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol Pressley, .3, pp.545-561). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rigney, J.W. (1978). Learning strategies a theoretical perspective. In H.F. O'Neil (Ed.), Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance (Vol. 6, pp. 573-603). New York: Academic Press.
Rumelhart, David E., and Andrew Ortony. 1977. The representation of knowledge in memory. In Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge, Richard C. Anderson, Rand J. Spiro, and William E. Montague (Eds.), 99-135. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rumelhart, David E. 1980. Schemata: the building blocks of cognition. InTheoretical issues in reading comprehension, Rand J. Spiro, Bertram C.Bruce, and William E. Brewer (Eds.), 33-58. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Salataci. R.,&Ahyel, A. (2002). Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2 reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14 (1), 1一17.
Sarig, G. (1987). High-level reading in the first and in the foreign language: Some comparative process data. In J. Devine, P. L. Carrell, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Research in reading in English as a second language (pp. 105-120). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1984) Development of strategies in text processing.In H. Mandl, N. Stein and T. Trabasso (eds) Learning and Comprehension of Text (pp. 379–406). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sheorey, R. (1999). "An examination of language learning strategy use in the setting of an indigenized variety of English" system, 27, 173-190.
Sheorey R. & Mokhtari K, ( 2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 432.
Singhal M. (2001). Reading proficiency reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and second language readers. The Reading Matrix 1, 1.
Smith, (1973). Psycholinguistics and reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71.
Sternberg, R. J.&Powell, J. S. (1883). verbal comprehension. American Psychologist, 38, 878-893.
Thompson, I., & Rubin, J. (1993). Improving listening comprehension in Russian. Washington, DC: Department of Education. International Research and Studies Program.
Wade, S.E. (1990). Using think alouds to assess comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 43, 7, 442-451.
Waxman, H.C and Padron, Y. (1987). The effect of ESL students' perceptions of their cognitive strategies on reading achievement. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, Dallas.
William,(1991). Current Developments in Second Language Reading Research 375 TESOL QUARTERLY Volume 25, Number 3 Autum.
Winograd, Peter & Victoria Chou Hare. (1988). "Direct Instruction of Reading Comprehension Strategies: The Nature of Teacher Explanation." Learning and Study Strategie:. Issues in Assessment, Instruction, and Evaluation. Ed. Claire E. Weinstein, Ernest T. Goetz & Patricia A. Alexander. San Diego: Academic, 121-39.
Yorio, C. (1971). Some sources of reading problems for foreign language learners.Languag Learning, 21, 107-115.
Young, D. J., & Oxford, R. (1997). A gender-related analysis of strategies used to process written input in the native language and a foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 8, 43–73.
刘慧君.元认知策略与英语阅读的关系[J].外语与外语教学. 2004, (12)
刘春燕.新手与专家的阅读元认知比较研究[J] .国外外语教学,2005,(2):22-25.
潘黎萍.元认知策略在二语课堂阅读中的可教性实验研究[J].外语教学.2006.(1):4} 54.
杨小虎,张文鹏.元认知与中国大学生英语阅读理解相关研究[J] .外语教学与研究,2002,(3):213-217.
Afflerbach, P.P., & Johnston, P.H. (1986). What do expert readers do when the main idea is not explicit? In J.F. Baumann (Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension (pp. 49-72). Newark International Reading Association.
Alderson, J., 1984. Reading in a foreign language: a reading problem or a language problem? In: Alderson, C., Urquhart, X. (Eds.), Reading in a Foreign Language. Longman, New York, pp. 1–24.
Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson,&R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vo1.3, pp.285-310). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, Richard C., Ralph E. Reynolds, Diane L. Schallert, and Ernest T.Goetz. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal 14(4): 367-381.
Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), The handbook of reading research (pp. 255-292). New York: Longman.
Anderson, N.J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal 75: 460–472.
Anderson, N. J. 1999. Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies .Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Bacon, S. M. "The relationship between gender, comprehension, processing strategies, and cognitive and affective response in foreign language listening". Modern Language Journal, 76(1992), 160-178.
Baker, L.Brown, A. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of Reading Research. (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
Barnett, M. (1988). Reading through context: How real and perceived strategy use affects L2 Comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 72, 150-162.
Bartlett, Frederic C. 1932. Remembering: a study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bauman, J. (1982) Linguistic Structur and the Validity of Reading Comprehension Tests (FinalReport.G-80–0149).Washington,DC: National Institute of Education (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 218 950).
Baumann, J.F., Jones, L.A., & Seifert-Kessell, N. (1993). Using think alouds to enhance children's comprehension monitoring abilities. The Reading Teacher, 47(3), 184-193.
Benedetto, R. (1984). A psycholinguistic investigation of the top-level organization strategies in first and second language reading: Five case studies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University.
Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 463-494.
Block, E. L. (1992). See how they read: Comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. Quarterly, 26, 319-343.
Brantmeier, C. (2003). Does gender make a difference? Passage content and comprehension in second language reading. Reading in a Foreign Language Volume 15, Number 1, ISSN 1539-0578.
Brown, A. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem ofmetacognition. Hillsdale, NJ: In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology. 77-165. Erlbaum
Brown, A., Armbruster, B. and Baker, L. (1983). The role of metacognition in reading and studying . In J. Orsany (Ed.) Reading comprehension: From research to practice. (pp. 49-75). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaun.
Brown, H.D. (1987). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Prentice-Hall.
Carrell, Patricia L. 1983b. Some issues in studying the role of schemata, or background knowledge, in second language comprehension. Paper presented at the 17th Annual TESOL Convention, Toronto, Canada, March,1983.
Carrell, Devine, & Eskey, (1988), Interactive text processing: Implications for ESL/ second language reading classrooms. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 239-259). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. Modern Lauguage jourual, 73, 121-134.
Casanave, Christine P.“Comprehension Monitoring in ESL Reading: A Neglected Essential.”TESOL Quarterly 22 (1988): 283-302.
Clark,(1975) CLARK, HERBERT. Comprehension as an art. Paper read at the Psychology Symposium, Indiana University.
Clarke, M. A. (1979). Reading in Spanish and English: Evidence from adult ESL students. Language Learning, 29, 121-150.
Clarke, M. A. (1980). The short circuit hypothesis of ESL reading-or when language competence interferes with reading performance. Modern Language Journal, 27, 135-154.
Coady, J. (1979). A psycholinguistic model of the ESL reader. In R. Mackay, B. Barkman, & R. R. Jordon (Eds.), Reading in a second language: Hypotheses, organization, and practice (pp. 5-12). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Cohen, A. D. (1990). Language learning: insight for learners, teachers, and researchers. NewYork: Ness burv House Publishers.
Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of language proficiency: Implications for bilingual education and the optimal age issue. TESOL Quarterly, 14, 175-187.
Cziko, G., 1978. Differences in first and second language reading: the use of syntactic, semantic, and discourse constraints. Canadian Modern Language Review 34, 473–489.
Cziko, G. A. (1980). Language competence and reading strategies: A comparison offirst-and second-language oral reading errors. Language Learning, 30, 101-114.
David Pearson (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research 61 (2): 239–264.
Devine, Joanne (1984). "ESL Readers' Internalized Models of the Reading Process." On TESOL '83. Ed. Jean Handscombe, Richard Orem & Barry Taylor. Washington: TESOL, 95-108.
Devine, J., 1993. The role of metacognition in second language reading and writing. In: Carson, J., Leki, I. (Eds.), Reading in the Composition Classroom: Second Language Perspectives. Heinle and Heinle, Boston.
Ehrman, M. & R, Oxford. (1989). Effects of gender differences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies. Modern Language Journal, 73(1), 1-13.
Ehrman, M.E., and Oxford, R. (1995). Cognition plus: correlates of language learning success. The Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 67-89.
Ericsson, K., & Simon, H.J. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215- 251.
Flavell, J. H. 1976. Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 231-236.
Flavell, J.H. (1978). Metacognitive development. In J.M. Scandura & C.J. Brainerd, eds., Structural/Process theories of Complex Human Behaviour (pp. 213–245). The Netherlands: Sijthoff and Noordhoff.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation and Understanding (pp. 21-29). Hillside, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Garner, R., & Krauss, K. (1982). Good and poor comprehender differences in knowing and regulating reading behaviors. Educational Research Quarterly, 6, 5-12.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Goodman, K.S. 1970. Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In R. B.
Ruddell&H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 259-271.
Goodman, K. (1973). Psycholinguistic universals in the reading process. In F. Smith (Ed.), Psycholinguistics and reading (pp. 21-27). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406.
Green, J and Oxford, R "A Closer Look at Learning strategies, L2 Proficiency, and Gender" TESOL Quarterly (29) 1995: 261-297.
Guthrie, J., & Wigfield, A. (1999). How motivation fits into a science of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 199-205.
Harris, P. L., Kruithof, A., Meerum Terwogt, M.,&Visser, T. (1981). Children's detection and awareness of textual anomaly. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31(6), 212-230.
Hauptman, Philip C. "A Comparison of First and Second Language Reading Strategies among English- speaking University Students." Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 4 (1979): 173-201.
Hosenfeld, C. (1977). A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of successful and nonsuccessful second language learners. System 5, 110-123.
Hudson, T. (1982). The effects of induced schemata on the“short-circuit”in L2 reading performance. Language Learning, 32, 1-30.
Jacobs, J. E.,&Paris, S. Cz (1987). Children's metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22, 255-278.
Kluwe, R. (1982). Cognitive lnowledge and executive control: Metacognition. In D. RGriffin (Ed.), Animal mind-human mind (pp. 201-224). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Knight, Stephanie L. (1985). Yolanda Padron & Hersholt C. Waxman. "The Cognitive Reading Strategies of ESL Students." TESOL Quarterly 19, 789-92.
Knight, S., Padron, Y. and Waxman, H.C.. (1985). The cognitive reading strategies ofESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 789-792.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Macnamara, J. (1970). Comparative studies of reading and problem solving in two languages. TESOL Quarterly, 4, 107-116.
Miller,1963; A. Language and communicacation. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.
Molhtari, K.,& Reichard, C. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32 (3), 379-394.
Myers, M., & Paris, S. (1978). Children’s metacognitive knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 680-690.
Nyikos, M. (1990). Gender-related differences in adult language learning: Socialization and memory factors. Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 273-287.
Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1989).Research on Language learning strategies: methods, language findings, and instructional issues. Modernal Language Journal, 73.
Oxford R.L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know. Boston: Newsburv House.
Oxford, R., et al. (1993). "Gender differences in second/ foreign language learning styles and strategies". In Exploringgender Ed. J. Sutherland. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Oxford, R. (1994). Language learning strategies: An Update. [verified 7 Feb 2005] http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/oxford01.html.
O'Malley, M. J.,&Chamot, A刀.(2001). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at gender and strategy use in L2 reading. Language Learning 53:4, 649-702.
Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitivestrategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing, 20(1), 26-56.
Pressley, M., Snyder, B. & Cariglia-Bull, B. (1987). How can good strategy use be taught to children? Evaluation of six alternative approaches. In S. Cormier & J. Hagman, eds., Transfer of Learning: Contemporary Research and Application (pp. 81–120). Orlando, FL: Academic Press
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson,&R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol Pressley, .3, pp.545-561). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rigney, J.W. (1978). Learning strategies a theoretical perspective. In H.F. O'Neil (Ed.), Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance (Vol. 6, pp. 573-603). New York: Academic Press.
Rumelhart, David E., and Andrew Ortony. 1977. The representation of knowledge in memory. In Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge, Richard C. Anderson, Rand J. Spiro, and William E. Montague (Eds.), 99-135. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rumelhart, David E. 1980. Schemata: the building blocks of cognition. InTheoretical issues in reading comprehension, Rand J. Spiro, Bertram C.Bruce, and William E. Brewer (Eds.), 33-58. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Salataci. R.,&Ahyel, A. (2002). Possible effects of strategy instruction on L1 and L2 reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14 (1), 1一17.
Sarig, G. (1987). High-level reading in the first and in the foreign language: Some comparative process data. In J. Devine, P. L. Carrell, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Research in reading in English as a second language (pp. 105-120). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1984) Development of strategies in text processing.In H. Mandl, N. Stein and T. Trabasso (eds) Learning and Comprehension of Text (pp. 379–406). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sheorey, R. (1999). "An examination of language learning strategy use in the setting of an indigenized variety of English" system, 27, 173-190.
Sheorey R. & Mokhtari K, ( 2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 432.
Singhal M. (2001). Reading proficiency reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and second language readers. The Reading Matrix 1, 1.
Smith, (1973). Psycholinguistics and reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71.
Sternberg, R. J.&Powell, J. S. (1883). verbal comprehension. American Psychologist, 38, 878-893.
Thompson, I., & Rubin, J. (1993). Improving listening comprehension in Russian. Washington, DC: Department of Education. International Research and Studies Program.
Wade, S.E. (1990). Using think alouds to assess comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 43, 7, 442-451.
Waxman, H.C and Padron, Y. (1987). The effect of ESL students' perceptions of their cognitive strategies on reading achievement. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, Dallas.
William,(1991). Current Developments in Second Language Reading Research 375 TESOL QUARTERLY Volume 25, Number 3 Autum.
Winograd, Peter & Victoria Chou Hare. (1988). "Direct Instruction of Reading Comprehension Strategies: The Nature of Teacher Explanation." Learning and Study Strategie:. Issues in Assessment, Instruction, and Evaluation. Ed. Claire E. Weinstein, Ernest T. Goetz & Patricia A. Alexander. San Diego: Academic, 121-39.
Yorio, C. (1971). Some sources of reading problems for foreign language learners.Languag Learning, 21, 107-115.
Young, D. J., & Oxford, R. (1997). A gender-related analysis of strategies used to process written input in the native language and a foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 8, 43–73.
刘慧君.元认知策略与英语阅读的关系[J].外语与外语教学. 2004, (12)
刘春燕.新手与专家的阅读元认知比较研究[J] .国外外语教学,2005,(2):22-25.
潘黎萍.元认知策略在二语课堂阅读中的可教性实验研究[J].外语教学.2006.(1):4} 54.
杨小虎,张文鹏.元认知与中国大学生英语阅读理解相关研究[J] .外语教学与研究,2002,(3):213-217.