时间：2022-09-08 01:14:30
Abstract：In language learning， in particular second language learning context， metacognition seems to be quite a buzzword nowadays. However， as a concept coined in psychology， it brings a series of challenges to language teachers who intend to concretize it in pedagogy. This paper intends to illuminate classroom practitioners by detailing the evolution of this concept from learning strategy research， its framework as constructed in language learning area， and the practice of implementing metacognitive instruction in English reading courses.
Key words：metacognition；metacognitive instruction；English reading
中图分类号： H319 文献标识码： A 文章编号：1672-1578（2012）11-0004-02
The sustained popularity of research on language learning strategies provides us with rich information in understanding how learners learn a language and how language teachers can maximize learners’ learning effects through strategy instruction. In this paper， I will take a focused review on reading strategy investigations to outline the recent development of research from strategy， to metacognition and finally to the concretization of findings along this line in reading pedagogies.
1 Research on Reading Strategies
Within the domain of reading， researchers identified a series of effective strategies readers use in English learning， such as differencing， summarizing， forming questions， activating prior knowledge （Grabe， 2009：209）. A substantial body of empirical studies also endorse the effectiveness of explicit teaching of specific reading strategies in improving students’ reading comprehension （Carrell， Pharis， & Liberto， 1989； Zhang， 2008）.
2 Development of Research on Learning Strategies
With growing research on strategy use later on， it is gradually revealed that it is simply not the case that the inclusion of a strategy leads to reading improvement. The key point doesn’t lie in knowing “what strategy to use”， but in how to “apply them strategically” （Anderson ， 1991： 468-469）. Some studies further demonstrates that less effective language leaners sometimes even use strategies as frequently as their more successful peers， but they use differently （Chamot & El-Dinary， 1999）. Good language learners demonstrate adeptness at matching strategies to the task they are working on. while less successful learners seem to lack the metacognitive knowledge to manage their reading process and choose appropriate strategies when needed. These findings facilitate learning strategy researchers and language teachers to turning their attention from strategies to metacognition in language learning.
3 Metacognition in Language Learning
Met cognition refers to an individual’s knowledge and regulation of thinking and learning （Flavell， 1976）. To put it another way， metacognition has two layers of meanings： what and why we are thinking in relation to a learning task or situation in a particular way； and the ability to regulate these thinking processes （Goh， 2008： 193）.
Metacognitive knowledge， is further developed by Wenden （1998：46） into declarative knowledge， procedual knowledge and conditional knowledge in her studying of metacognition in the language learning demain. Declarative knowledge refers to leaner’s knowledge of oneself and one’s learning. Procedural knowledge includes general knowledge about what stragegies are， specific knowledge about when and how to use them and their effectiveness. Conditional knowledge refers to learner’s knowledge of task purpose， task types and task demands.
Metacognitive regulation refers to “a higher order process [which] orchestrates and directs other cognitive skills” （Paris， Cross & Lipson， 1984： 1241）. More specifically in reading context， metacognition is concerned about learners’ being aware of his or her comprehension processing and knowing when， where， and how to use strategies appropriately and effectively（Grabe， 2009： 222）.
The inclusion of metacognition in learning strategy research puts forwards two questions： 1） What on earth constitutes the teaching of a reading strategy？ 2） Given the significance of metacognition in strategy use， how to integrate the metacogntive elements into reading strategy training？
4 Strategy Training within the Framework of Metacogition
According to the above described metacogntion system， a thorough teaching of a target strategy to a learner should at least invovle two aspects： metacoginition knowledge and metacognitive regulation. For metacognition knowledge instruciton， six elements about the strategy need to be addressed： What is the strategy； Why should a strategy be learned； How is the strategy used； Where should the strategy be used； When should the strategy be used； How should the use of the strategy be evaluated （Carrel， 1998， Zhang， 2008）.
The development of learners’ metacognitive regulation in strategy training focuses on improving their ability to regulate their own learning processes and to use strategies appropriately in specific learning situations. It mainly include planing for the learning， monitoring a learnig task while it is in progress， and evaluating the learning outcome once a task has been completed （Chamot， 2005： 124）. In the actual implemention of metacognitive strategy training， two aspects need to be considered：
1）Explict or implicit strategy instruction
Explicit instruction includes developing students’awareness of their strategies， such as informing stduents of the value and purpose of strategy instruction，scaffolding strategic thinking， and providing opportunities for students to practice and self-evaluate their stratege learning effects. While， implicit teaching simply encourages learners to use the target strategy without metacognitive intervetion. Research at present supports explicit instruction （Cohen， 2003）.
2）Single or Multiple-strategy instruction
Current research tends to support combined strategy training. The frequently-mentioned and empirically- supported multiple-strategy training approaches are SQ3R （Survey-Question-Read-Recite-Review）， CSR （Collaborative Strategic Reading）， SERT （Self-Explantion Reading Training）， TSR （Transactional Strategies Instruction）， and CORI （Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction） （for details， see Grabe， 2009）.
5 Selected Presentation of Metacognitive Reading
Strategy Instruction Models
To facilitate our understanding of metacognitive reading strategy instruction， two studies representative of this kind of instruction in ESL and EFL contexts are discribed respectively.
Zhang’s （2008） took a two-stage reciprocal teaching approach to 99 ESL university learners in a reading programm. In the first stage， Ss’ metacognitive knowledge is enriched through group discussion of reading strategies students usually use and strategies used in a real reading task. In the second stage， students’ self-regulating ability is developed by means of self-questioning and self-re？ection. This approach to strategy training， as demonstrated by the author， significantly improved ESL students’ use of reading strategies and their reading comprehension as well.
The next metacognitive reading strategy training （Shang， & Chang-Chien， 2010） took the approach of Self-Questioning on EFLlearners in Taiwan. The eight weeks’ instruction involves three stages： teacher’s demonstration， students’ group work and students’ individual practice.The teacher first demonstrated this strategy by introducing self-questioning strategy techniques. After teacher’s demonstration， students were directed to practice generating questions before， during and after reading within small groups. After two- week’s training， students’ individual practice was implemented. Results of the study demonstrated that Ss had positive attitudes in future use of the strategy and Ss’ reading comprehension was enhanced significantly.
Although nowadays increasingly more researchers strengthen the importance of metacogntion in reading， few study focuses on the various dimenstions of metacogntive knowledge and strategies in EFL context. There is so far insufficient empirical research into the effect of learners’ metacognitive training of any kind on Chinese EFL learners at different levels. This review of research on strategy， metacognition and instruction worldwide is expected to shed light on EFL reading instruciton in Chinese context.
References：
[1]Anderson， N. Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal， 1991.75， 460-472.
[2]Baker， L. Metacognition in comprehension instruction. In C. Block & M. Pressley（Eds.）， Comprehension instruction： Research-based best practices （pp. 77-95）. NY： Guilford Press. 2002.
[3]Carrell， P， Wise， T， & Gajdusek， L. Metacognition and ESL/EFL reading. Instructional Science， 1998. 26（1-2）， 97-112.
[4]Carrell， P. L. Can reading strategies be successfully taught？ Australian Review of Applied Linguistics， 1998.21（1）， 1-20.
[5]Carrell， P. L， Pharis， B， & Liberto， J. Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly， 1989.23， 647-678.
[6]Chamot， A. U. Language learning strategy instruction： Current issues and research Annual Review of Applied Linguistics （Vol. 25， pp. 112-130）. NY： Cambridge University Press. 2005.
[7]Chamot，A.U，& El-Dinary， P. B. Children's learning strategies in immersion classroom. The Modern Language Journal， 1999. 83（3）， 319-341.
[8]Cohen，A.D. The learner’s side of foreign language learning： Where do style， strategies，and tasks meet？ International Review of Applied Linguistics， 2003. 41， 279-291.
[9]Flavell， J. H. Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick （Ed.）， The Nature of Intelligence（pp. 231-235）. Hillsdale， NJ： Erlbaum. 1976.
[10]Goh，C.Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development ：Theory， practice and research implications. RELC Journal， 2008. 39（2）， 188-213.
[11]Grabe，W.Reading a second language： moving from theory to practice. NY： Cambridge University Press. 2009.
[12]Paris，S.G，Cross，D.R， & Lipson， M. Y. Informed strategies for learning： A program to improve children’s reading awareness and comprehension.Journal of Educational Psychology， 1984. 6， 12391252.
[13Shang，H.F，& Chang-Chien，I.J. The Effect of Self-Questioning Strategy on EFL Learners’Reading Comprehension Development The International Journal of Learning， 2010. 17（2）， 40-54.
[14]Wenden，A.L. Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics， 1998. 19（4）， 515-537.
[15]Zhang，L.J.I.S. Constructivist pedagogy in strategic reading instruction： Exploring pathways to learner development in the English as a second language（ESL） classroom. Instructional Science，2008. 36，89-116.