The role of meta‐cognitive cues on the comprehension of proficient and poor readers

Abstract

We explored whether performance differences exist between proficient and poor readers on implicit text information. Next, we explored whether indices of meta‐cognitive monitoring predicted reading performance. Finally, we examined whether poor and proficient readers exhibited distinct meta‐cognitive profiles with respect to reading comprehension ability. Chilean undergraduate students (N = 146) completed a task on inconsistency detection within texts and a standardised reading comprehension performance measure, which we used, along with confidence in performance judgements, to calculate meta‐cognitive monitoring accuracy. Our results confirmed that proficient readers outperformed poor readers on nearly all measures of interest, except global retrospective meta‐cognitive monitoring judgements, and that proficient readers performed significantly better on items related to implicit information of texts than poor readers. Additionally, when combined in a single group, number of inconsistencies correctly detected and repaired and accurate global evaluation of learning judgements significantly predicted reading performance whereas retrospective global and local meta‐cognitive monitoring judgements did not. Of special significance to our investigation, when separated in two groups, poor and proficient readers exhibited unique meta‐cognitive profiles. Proficient and poor readers employ different meta‐cognitive strategies, and poor readers benefit more from strategies than proficient readers.

Calibrating calibration: A meta-analysis of learning strategy instruction interventions to improve metacognitive monitoring accuracy.

“…First, regardless of what types of strategies are taught, research supports the conclusion that teaching students strategies of any type improves critical learning outcomes such as metacomprehension accuracy (Griffin et al, 2008; Gutierrez & Schraw, 2015; Hacker et al, 2008; Soto et al, 2020; Thiede & Anderson, 2003; Thiede et al, 2005), especially in underperforming students (Bol et al, 2005; Gutierrez de Blume, 2017). Regarding level of learning strategy, research demonstrated that deep learning strategies are the most successful at improving learning and are more enduring than superficial strategies (Baeten et al, 2010; Dinsmore & Alexander, 2012; Struyven et al, 2006).…”

“…A series of studies has found that when students were explicitly instructed to use learning strategies, they were more likely to not only be engaged in the topic, but also to better regulate their learning process, and, consequently, improve learning outcomes. Hacker et al (2008), for example, reported positive effects for reflection, and Soto et al (2020) found that inferencing, as a metacognitive cue, improved learning and metacomprehension accuracy when explicitly taught to students. On a similar vein, several studies showed positive effects for learning and metacomprehension accuracy when students were trained in the use of specific strategies like rereading and summarizing (Griffin et al, 2008; Gutierrez & Schraw, 2015; Thiede & Anderson, 2003; Thiede et al, 2005).…”

The role of metacognitive competences in the development of school achievement among gifted adolescents

“…The aforementioned studies mainly used calibration tasks (i.e., retrospective judgments of learning) to measure procedural metacognitive competences. Soto et al (2020) suggested that the performance in specific tasks that require monitoring, as it is required in an inconsistency task, might be more strongly associated with the achievement in reading comprehension than retrospective judgments of learning, which are used in calibration tasks.…”

Impact of literacy across content on middle school students' reading comprehension in a rural context

“…By explicitly teaching students how vocabulary can be readily adapted across content areas, students can more easily access what they already know about the topic(s) from long‐term memory and infer deeper, more enriched meanings from information not included in the texts. Presumably, this enhances the reading comprehension skills of the students (Kintsch, 1988, 1998; Kintsch & Rawson, 2007; Soto et al, 2019; Soto, Gutierrez de Blume, Carrasco Bernal, & Contreras Castro, 2020) by connecting information across content areas. As research on factors that influence Lexile performance has shown, explicitly teaching strategies to improve reading comprehension, such as our own literacy across content approach, should enhance students' inferential skills (Soto et al, 2019).…”