X hits on this document

PDF document

THE EFFECTS OF RECIPROCAL TEACHING ON ENGLISH READING - page 98 / 233

612 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

98 / 233

84

result shows significant differences at level the 0.05 level (p < 0.05) when it is classified

under the metacognitive strategy Selective Attention.

Planning

Mean 3.39

SD 0.65

Level M

Mean 3.99

SD 0.51

Level H

9.049*

Monitoring

3.37

0.56

M

3.85

0.42

H

7.926*

Evaluating

3.53

0.64

H

4.12

0.52

H

10.503*

Comparison of the Metacognitive Strategy Processes the Students Employed before and

after Reciprocal Teaching

Table 4.6 shows the metacognitive strategy processes (planning, monitoring, and

evaluating) the students employed before and after reciprocal teaching.

Table 8 Comparison of the Metacognitive Processes the Students Employed Before and

After Reciprocal Teaching

strategy, the students moderately planned and monitored, below a mean score of 3.5.

Concerning the process of planning, they employed four metacognitive reading strategies:

Prediction (items 1, 2, 4), Goal Setting (items 3, 18), Background Activation (items 6, 7),

and Self-management (item 8), with a mean score of 3.39. For monitoring, they employed

three metacognitive reading strategies: Inferences (item 10), Selective Attention (items 9,

11, 12, 17, 20), and Note Taking (item 15), with a mean score of 3.37.

However, this table shows that the students employed the process of evaluating at

the mean score of 3.53, which is above the moderate level. In this process, they employed

Metacognitive Strategy Processes

**p <0 .01

From Table 4.6, it can be seen that before receiving instructions on the reading

Experimental Group (N = 30)

Before training

After training

T

Document info
Document views612
Page views627
Page last viewedSat Dec 03 12:25:38 UTC 2016
Pages233
Paragraphs5584
Words51378

Comments