Reading Strategy, Amount of Writing, Metacognition, Metamemory, and Apprehension as Predictors of English Written Proficiency
Title
Reading Strategy, Amount of Writing, Metacognition, Metamemory, and Apprehension as Predictors of English Written Proficiency
Reading Strategy, Amount of Writing, Metacognition, Metamemory, and Apprehension as Predictors of English Written Proficiency
Keywords: writing proficiency in English, reading strategy, metacognition, metamemory
Authors
Carlo Magno
De La Salle University, Manila
Carlo Magno
De La Salle University, Manila
Bio Data
Carlo Magno is presently an Assistant Professor at the Counseling and Educational Psychology Department at
De La Salle University-Manila. He finished his PhD in Educational Psychology major in Measurement and Evaluation. His current research interests are psycholinguistics, self-regulation, learner-centeredness, and teacher performance. He has published in local and international refereed journals and has presented his studies at different international conferences.
Abstract
This study investigated whether reading strategy, amount of writing, metacognition, metamemory, and apprehension significantly predicts writing proficiency in English. The sample is composed of 159 college students taking up their English course. Five instruments were administered for each of the predictor variables of written proficiency. The participants were asked to make an essay as measure of their written proficiency and were rated using the Test of Written English (TWE) scoring guide. The Pearson r was used to correlate the predictor variables with written proficiency. A multiple regression analysis was used to determine which predictor is significant. The intercorrelations revealed that all seven variables (reading strategy, amount of writing, knowledge of cognition, regulation of cognition, MMQ-contentment, MMQ-ability, MMQ-strategy, and apprehension) were significant and had high correlations with written proficiency. Correlation coefficient values ranged from .41 to .76 and significant at a=.001. The multiple regression analysis revealed that reading strategy, metamemory strategy, and regulation of cognition are significant predictors and when combined explained 58% of the variance in written proficiency. The semi partial correlations indicated that metamemory strategy as the best predictor, explaining 5% of the variance in written proficiency. Reading strategy, the next best predictor, explained 4% of the variance, and regulation of cognition explains 3.5% of the variance. Pedagogical implications include using the strategies in teaching students to write English compositions.
This study investigated whether reading strategy, amount of writing, metacognition, metamemory, and apprehension significantly predicts writing proficiency in English. The sample is composed of 159 college students taking up their English course. Five instruments were administered for each of the predictor variables of written proficiency. The participants were asked to make an essay as measure of their written proficiency and were rated using the Test of Written English (TWE) scoring guide. The Pearson r was used to correlate the predictor variables with written proficiency. A multiple regression analysis was used to determine which predictor is significant. The intercorrelations revealed that all seven variables (reading strategy, amount of writing, knowledge of cognition, regulation of cognition, MMQ-contentment, MMQ-ability, MMQ-strategy, and apprehension) were significant and had high correlations with written proficiency. Correlation coefficient values ranged from .41 to .76 and significant at a=.001. The multiple regression analysis revealed that reading strategy, metamemory strategy, and regulation of cognition are significant predictors and when combined explained 58% of the variance in written proficiency. The semi partial correlations indicated that metamemory strategy as the best predictor, explaining 5% of the variance in written proficiency. Reading strategy, the next best predictor, explained 4% of the variance, and regulation of cognition explains 3.5% of the variance. Pedagogical implications include using the strategies in teaching students to write English compositions.
[private]
See pages: 16-48
[/private]Category: Monthly Editions, Volume 29
