Impacts of Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies on Vocabulary Learning in Junior Students
محورهای موضوعی : Research in English Language Pedagogy
1 - Department of English Literature and Language, Faculty of Humanities, Qom, Iran
کلید واژه: Metacognitive strategies, English, Vocabulary, Students, language, Cognitive strategies, Junior,
چکیده مقاله :
According to the importance of vocabulary and expanding the range of vocabulary in English learning, today it is effective and necessary to use methods and strategies to increase the amount of learning and the speed of learning. This research has used a mixed method and the purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of cognitive and metacognitive strategies on the learning of English vocabulary of junior high school students. To conduct this research, 25 students aged 13 to 15 years were selected through an English proficiency level test to ensure that students were at the same level in English skills. The students were divided into two experimental and control groups, and a pre-test was done. Then vocabulary was taught to the students based on cognitive and metacognitive strategies, and finally, a post-test was taken from them and Karami's questionnaire (2002) was given to them. Finally, to investigate the performance of the two groups and the effect of training based on cognitive and metacognitive strategies, independent sample t-test, ANOVA, and paired samples t-test was used. The most important finding of this research is that cognitive and metacognitive strategies have been effective in English vocabulary learning of junior high school students, and they use cognitive strategies more than metacognitive strategies to learn English vocabulary.
Alavi, S. M., & Kaivanpanah, S. (2006). Cognitive and metacognitive vocabulary learning strategies across fields of study. Journal of Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye Khareji.
Ashoori, J., Azadmard, S. H., Jalil Abkenar, S., & Moeini Kia, M. (2014). A prediction model of academic achievement based on cognitive and metacognitive strategies, achievement goals orientation and spiritual intelligence in biology. Journal of School Psychology, 2(4), 118-136.
Banisaeid, M. (2013). Comparative effect of memory and cognitive strategies training on EFL intermediate learners’ vocabulary learning. Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(8).
Blachowicz, C. (1986). Making Connections: Alternatives to the vocabulary notebook. Journal of Reading, 29(7), 643-64.
Catalan, R. (2003). Sex differences in L2 vocabulary strategies. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1) 54-77.
Gagne, R. M. (1985). The condition of learning and the theory of instruction. Holt, Rinehart and Winston
Golzarnia, H., & Rahmani, R. (2018). The effect of teaching the etymology of words to learn and reinforce vocabulary by Iranian children. Journal of Teaching English Language Studies, 6(4).
Halliday, M. (2006). On language and linguistics (J. J., Webester, Ed.). A&C Black
Hamzah, M. S. G., Kafipour, R., & Abdullah, S. K. (2009). Vocabulary learning strategies of Iranian undergraduate EFL students and its relation to their vocabulary size. European Journal of social sciences, 11(1), 39-50.
Haynes, J. (2013). Challenges for English language learners (ELLs) in content area learning.
Santa Ana College.
Hossein Khani, Z., Fatehi, 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.
Rivas, S., Saiz, C., & Ossa, C. (2022). Metacognitive strategies and development of critical thinking in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
Rogers, J. (2018). Teaching/Developing vocabulary through metacognition. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1-6.
Saeedzadeh, M., Raeisoon, M. R., & Mohammadi, Y. (2018). The relationship between cognitive and metacognitive strategies and academic achievement of students of Birjand university of medical sciences. Future of Medical Education Journal, 8(1).
Schmitt, N. (2014). Size and Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge: What the Research Shows.
Shira, L., & Linda, S. (2005). The effects of comprehensive vocabulary instruction on title students’ metacognitive word-learning skills and reading comprehension. Journal of Literacy Research, 37(2) 163-200.
Stanovich, K. (1986). Matthew effects in Reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. 21(4), 360-407.
Weinstein, C., & Mayer, R. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies.
Weiwei, Zh., Donglan, Zh., & Lawrence. J. Z. (2021). Metacognitive instruction for sustainable Learning: Learners’ perceptions of task difficulty and use of metacognitive strategies in completing integrated speaking tasks. Journal of Sustainable Language Learning and Teaching, 13(11).
Zhang, W., Zhang, D., & Zhang, L. J. (2021). Metacognitive instruction for sustainable learning: Learners’ perceptions of task difficulty and use of metacognitive strategies in completing integrated speaking tasks. Sustainability, 13(11).
