10.57647/jals.2025.0502.06

The Impact of Metacognitive Strategies Instruction through Individual versus Collaborative Tasks on Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension

PDF
  • Maryam Talebi Amre’i1,
  • Shaban Najafi Karimi*1,
  • Amir Marzban1,
  1. Department of English Language, QaS. C., Islamic Azad University, Qaemshahr, Iran

Received: 2025-01-20

Revised: 2025-02-10

Accepted: 2025-12-29

Published in Issue 2025-12-30

Copyright (c) 2025 Maryam Talebi Amre’i, Shaban Najafi Karimi, Amir Marzban (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Talebi Amre’i, M., Najafi Karimi, S., & Marzban, A. (2025). The Impact of Metacognitive Strategies Instruction through Individual versus Collaborative Tasks on Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension. Journal of Applied Linguistics Studies, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.57647/jals.2025.0502.06
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 3

Abstract

Reading comprehension remains a central goal in EFL education, yet learners’ metacognitive awareness often limits transfer of strategies to authentic tasks. Collaborative strategic reading (CSR) integrates metacognitive strategies within group activity, potentially enhancing comprehension through social interaction. In Iranian EFL contexts, limited empirical work compares collaborative versus individual metacognitive interventions against conventional instruction. The present quasi-experimental study examined these approaches to determine their relative effectiveness for intermediate learners; that is, it probed into the impact of metacognitive intervention through collaborative versus individual reading tasks, compared with the conventional reading instruction, through the collaborative strategic reading (CSR) model. To this end, 75 Iranian intermediate EFL learners were identified through Oxford Placement Tests (OPTs) and further randomly assigned to two experimental groups and a control group, each having 25 participants. The experimental groups received the metacognitive intervention through collaborative versus individual reading tasks and the control group followed the conventional reading instruction in place at the two high schools in Sari, Iran. Results revealed the higher impact of the metacognitive intervention through the collaborative reading tasks followed by the individual reading tasks and the conventional reading instruction. Our findings have collectively pointed to the effectiveness of the CSR model and introduced it as an effective reading instructional approach within the metacognitive reading instruction framework, which has the capacity to improve the reading comprehension of Iranian intermediate EFL learners. Implications and directions for future research are also provided at the end.

Keywords

  • Cognitive strategies,
  • Collaborative strategic reading,
  • Collaborative tasks,
  • CSR model,
  • Individual tasks,
  • Metacognitive intervention,
  • Metacognitive strategies
PDF

References

  1. Akyol, H., Çakıroğlu, A., & Kuruyer, H. G. (2014). A Study on the Development of Reading Skills of the Students Having Difficulty in Reading: Enrichment Reading Program. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 6(2), 199–212.
  2. Al-Mekhlafi, A. (2018). EFL learners metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11220a
  3. Al Rabah, S., & Wu, S. (2018). A descriptive analysis of the metacognitive reading strategies employed by EFL college students in Kuwait. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v9n1p25
  4. Al Seyabi, F., & Tuzlukova, V. (2015). Investigating EFL reading problems and strategies in post-basic schools and university foundation programmes: A study in the Omani context. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 11(2), 35–51.
  5. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen Irvine, C. K., & Walker, D. (2019). Introduction to research in education (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  6. August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language minority children and youth. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  7. Baker, C., Kirkland, R., Miller, S., Peterson, E., & Pulos, S. (2013). Meta-analysis reveals adult female superiority in “Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test”. North American Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 449–458.
  8. Baydık, B. (2011). Examining the use of metacognitive reading strategies of students with reading difficulties and their teachers’ reading comprehension instruction practices. TED EĞİTİM VE BİLİM, 36(162), 301–319.
  9. Boardman, A. G., Klingner, J. K., Buckley, P., Annamma, S., & Lasser, C. J. (2015). The efficacy of Collaborative Strategic Reading in middle school science and social studies classes. Reading and Writing, 28(1), 1257–1283.
  10. Bozkurt, M., & Memiş, A. (2013). Beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbilişsel okuduğunu anlama farkındalığı ve okuma motivasyonları ile okuma düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(3), 147–160.
  11. Broukal, M., & Nolan-Woods, E., (1991). NTC’s Preparation for the TOEFL. NTC Publishing Group.
  12. Caverly, D. C., Nicholson, S., & Radcliffe, R. (2004). Effectiveness of strategic reading instruction at the college level. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 35(1), 25–49.
  13. Cemiloğlu, M., & Ogur, E. (2016). Okuma öğretiminde biliş ve üst-biliş stratejileri. Uluslararası Hakemli İnsan ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi, Haziran, 118–137.
  14. Conley, M. W., & Wise, A. (2011). Comprehension for what? Preparing Students for their meaningful future. Theory into Practice, 50(2), 93–99.
  15. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
  16. Edizer, Z. Ç., Dilidüzgün, Ş., Başoğul, D. A., Karagöz, M. & Yücelşen, N. (2018). Türkçe öğretiminde üstbilişsel okuma stratejileri ile okuma yöntem-tekniklerinin metin türüne göre değerlendirilmesi. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 10(29), 479–511.
  17. Edmonds, M. S., et al. (2009). Synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–300.
  18. Falla, T., & Davis, P. A. (2017). Solutions Placement Tests (Elementary to Intermediate), Oxford University Press.
  19. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
  20. Gholinia, E., & Torabi, M. A. (2011). The effect of teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies on reading comprehension ability. The Journal of English Language Pedagogy And Practice. 4(1), 208–227.
  21. Goh, C. C., & Vandergrift, L. (2021). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. Routledge.
  22. Hadji Seyed Hossein Khani, Z. S., Fatehi Rad, N., & Jalali, V. (2023). The effectiveness of metacognitive awareness raising on reading comprehension and self-regulation of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 10(1), 119–141. https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2022.17575.2099
  23. İşeri, K. (2017). Sözden yazıya dile gelen metin. Pegem Akademi.
  24. Jafari, D., & Ketabi, S. (2012). Metacognitive Strategies and reading comprehension enhancement in Iranian intermediate EFL setting. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(3), 1–14.
  25. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Roseth, C. J., & Tichy, M. (2010). The impact of constructive controversy on moral development. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(4), 765–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00597.x
  26. Karabuğaa, F. (2012). Collaborative strategic reading with adult EFL learners: collaborative and reflective approach to reading. çukurova University Institute of Social Sciences.
  27. Karatay, H. (2009). Okuma stratejileri bilişsel farkındalık ölçeği. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2(19), 58–80.
  28. Khampool, W., & Chumworatayee, T. (2023). Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) instruction and its effects on Thai EAP university learners’ reading comprehension across two proficiency levels. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 16(2), 8–24.
  29. Khonamri, F., & Karimabadi, M. (2015). Collaborative strategic reading and critical reading ability of intermediate Iranian learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(7), 1–13.
  30. Kirkland, D. E. (2013). Urban literacy learning. In H. R. Milner IV & K. Lomotey (Eds.), Handbook of urban education (pp. 394–412). Routledge.
  31. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Schumn, J. S. (1998). Collaborative strategic reading during social studies in heterogeneous fourth grade classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 99(1), 3–22.
  32. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Argu¨elles, M. E., Hughes, M. T., & Ahwee, S. (2004). Collaborative Strategic Reading: “Real world” lessons from classroom teachers. Remedial and Special Education, 25(1), 291–302.
  33. Marboot, K., Mirzaei, A., & Roohani, A. (2020). Investigating Iranian EFL students metacognitive online reading strategies, critical thinking, and their relationship: A mixed-methods study. Issues in Language Teaching, 9(1), 151–182. https://doi.org/10.22054/ilt.2020.50833.475
  34. McCarthy, M., McCarten, J., & Sandiford, H., (2014). TOUCHSTONE Students’ Book 4 (ed. 4), Cambridge University Press.
  35. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32(3), 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.04.005
  36. Muhammadpour, M., & Khalili Sabet, M. (2024). The impact of an online hybrid reading intervention on the reading comprehension and strategy use of Iranian English for specific purposes students in relation to an evaluated researcher-made ESP textbook. Discover Education, 3(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00162-2
  37. Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A., Soter, A. O., Henessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 740–764.
  38. Nosratinia, M., & Mohammadi, E. (2017). The comparative effect of teaching metacognitive strategies and collaborative strategic reading on EFL learners’ reading comprehension. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 6(3), 158–167. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.3p.158
  39. Özbay, M., & Bahar, M. A. (2012). İleri okur ve üstbiliş eğitimi. Uluslararası Türkçe EdebiyatKültür Eğitim. Dergisi, 1(1), 158–177.
  40. Öztürk, E. (2012). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies inventory. İlköğretim Online, 11(2), 292–305.
  41. Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431–449.
  42. Takallou, F. (2011). The effect of metacognitive strategies instruction on EFL learners’ reading comprehension performance and metacognitive awareness. Asian EFL Journal, 13(1), 275–320.
  43. Tavakoli, H. (2014). The effectiveness of metacognitive strategy awareness in reading Comprehension: The case of Iranian university EFL students. The Reading Matrix, 14(2), 314–336.
  44. Vaughn, S., Klingner, J. K., Swanson, E. A., Boardman, A. G., Roberts, G., Mohammed, S. S., & Steelman-Spisak, S. J. (2011). Efficacy of collaborative strategic reading with middle school students. American Educational Research Journal, 48(4), 938–964.
  45. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  46. Zhang, L., & Seepho, S. (2013). Metacognitive strategy use and academic reading achievement: Insights from a Chinese context. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 54–61.
  47. Ziyaeemehr, Z. (2012). The efficacy of collaborative strategic reading on the reading comprehension of ESP learners. Higher Education of Social Science, 2(1), 38–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/j.hess.1927024020120201.2198