In the experimental group, the participants tried to clarify unknown words,
reference terms, and some confusing sentences (see Appendix H). As an example, here is
a dialogue from the audio-taping:
S1: “Multiple personality”, what is its meaning? What do you think
“multiple personality” mean? As we know “main personality” means
S 3 : Y o u s e e t h e w o r d s “ m u l t i p l e ” o r “ m a n y ” , t h a t i s “ m u l t i p l e ” m e a n s “ m a n y ” .
S1: Thus, “multiple” means “many”.
Moreover, as gathered from the interviews, it can be seen that all the participants
agreed that clarifying is an important strategy to comprehend a passage; they also knew
how to use it effectively (see Appendix J, Question 6).
To sum up, the participants in the experimental group used clarifying when they
faced problems with comprehension. They cleared up their understanding by asking
questions to sort out ambiguities, by rereading, reading further, consulting dictionaries
and friends, and asking the teacher for hints. Clarifying is one of the metacognitive
strategies that helped these students to improve their reading comprehension.
Summarizing helps readers focus on important information. Readers instructed in
summarization have greater recall of information. (Rinehart et al., 1986). This strategy
fosters a metacognitive process wherein they are conscious of making meaning
(Lysynchuck et al., 1990). Baker and Brown (1984) note that summarizing is a means of
In this study, the students developed this skill. The first day of working in groups,
most students’ summaries were left incomplete and contained too many details (see