Awareness in Reading: EFL Students ' Metacognitive Knowledge of Reading Strategies in an Acquisition-poor Environment
By Lawrence Jun Zhang. 2001
251 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8095d38b6684986d9b874a7c2b9c455a9695555e
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Christine Goh
- M. Veenman
- Lawrence Jun Zhang
- Hossein Tavakoli
- Aijiao Wu
- B. V. van Hout-Wolters
- Donglan Zhang
- Alex Poole
In Language and Linguistics
- Christine Goh
- Hossein Tavakoli
- Aijiao Wu
- Lawrence Jun Zhang
- Donglan Zhang
- Alex Poole
- Yuko Iwai
- Haiyan Bai
In Literature and Literary Theory
- Christine Goh
- Aijiao Wu
- Lawrence Jun Zhang
- Hossein Tavakoli
- Donglan Zhang
- Yuko Iwai
- Alex Poole
- Haiyan Bai
Citations in the corpus
- Strategy Knowledge and Perceived Strategy Use: Singaporean Students’ Awareness of Listening and Speaking Strategies (2006, methodology): “The MAILSS questionnaire is part of an extended questionnaire, which also includes person knowledge and task knowledge (D.L. Zhang, 2001).”
- The relationships and impact of teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and pedagogical understandings of metacognition (2010, background): “…metacognition has been the focus of many research studies (Carrell, Gajduske, & Wise, 1998; Wenden, 1998) because reading comprehension is a complex cognitive process that requires thinking about what the reader knows and the application of the reading processes (Baker, 2002; Zhang, 2001, 2008).”
- A Dynamic Metacognitive Systems Account of Chinese University Students' Knowledge About EFL Reading (2010, background): “Unfortunately, except for a few studies (e.g., Cotterall & Murray, 2009; Goh, 1997; White, 1999; Zhang, 2001; Zhang & Goh, 2006), many researchers have examined LLSs without focusing on the connection between EFL students’ metacognitive knowledge and their strategy use as dynamic systems in relation”
- Chinese senior high school EFL students’ metacognitive awareness and reading-strategy use (2009, background): “…readers generally display a higher degree of metacognitive awareness, which enables them to use reading strategies more effectively and efficiently than their unsuccessful peers (Carrell, 1989; Carrell et al., 1998; Hudson, 1998; Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001; Zhang, 2001; Zhang et al., 2008).”
- Gender Differences in Reading Strategy Use among ESL College Students (2005, background): “…for college second language readers (Anderson, 1991; Block, 1992; Cabral & Tavares, 2002; Carrell, Pharis, & Liberto, 1989; Upton, 1997; Yang, 2002; Zhang, 2001), and thus whatever gender differences that exist at lower profi ciency levels could be largely neutralized for advanced students.”
- Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations (2006, background): “Much research on metacognition only pertains to one specific task or domain, such as reading and text studying (Afflerbach, 1990; Leutner & Leopold, 2000; Nist, Simpson & Olejnik, 1991; Otero, Campanario & Hopkins, 1992; Van Kraayenoord & Schneider, 1999; Veenman & Beishuizen, 2004; Zhang, 2001), wr”
- The Effects of Metacognitive Reading Strategies: Pedagogical Implications for EFL/ESL Teachers. (2011, background): “Zhang (2001) looked at awareness of metacognitive strategies for different Englishproficiency levels of Chinese EFL college students who were learning English in their country.”
- Metacognitive Beliefs and Strategies in Learning Chinese as a Foreign Language. (2009, background): “It confirms the proposal that learner autonomy presupposes a high degree of metacognitive awareness (Chamot, 2005; Zhang 2001).”
- The Effectiveness of Metacognitive Strategy Awareness in Reading Comprehension: The Case of Iranian University EFL Students. (2014, result): “The findings of this study are, therefore, in line with those obtained by some previous studies (e.g., Anderson, 1991; Baker & Brown, 1984; Block, 1992; Cabral & Tavares, 2002; Carrell et al., 1989; Garner, 1987; Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995; Upton, 1997; Yang, 2002; Zhang, 2001).”