1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 透過學術英語讀寫課程發展中國大學生後設認知能力之個案研究
A Case Study on Developing Chinese University Students’ Metacognitive Competence through a Reading-to-write EAP Course
作者 王畇
Wang, Yun
貢獻者 許麗媛
Hsu, Li-Yuan
王畇
Wang, Yun
關鍵詞 後設認知能力的培養
後設認知的認知、情感和社會文化屬性
以讀促寫
學術素養能力的培養
後設認知支架教學
Development of metacognitive competence
Cognitive, affective and sociocultural nature of metacognition
Reading-based writing
Development of academic literacy skills
Metacognitively-scaffolded instruction
日期 2023
上傳時間 9-Mar-2023 18:23:48 (UTC+8)
摘要 近些年來，學界呼籲將後設認知這一概念的研究納入二語教學的領域（Zhang, 2018, 2019）， 以此作為深入了解語言學習者策略的新視角。在Flavell（1976, 1979）理論框架的指導下，Wenden（1987a, 1998）引領外語教學屆圍繞“通過提升後設認知意識使用學習策略從而更好地習得語言技能”展開了大量的研究。然而，交際教學法在二語屆的興起要求將後設認知的研究置於真實語言情境中。藉此，本文對後設認知概念的探討置於以讀促寫任務為導向的學術英語課程中進行。本文的研究重點有三。首先，在後設認知輔助教學的環境中探討中國英語學習者通過學術英語課程發展後設認知能力。其次，考察同等條件下學術素養技能的發展。最後，了解學生對後設認知輔助教學的普遍態度。
在多個案研究場景下，通過對學生博文的質性數據的分析，本研究展示了研究參與者後設認知能力的成長軌跡。在課程進行中，後設認知能力的三個重要面向交互影響，呈現動態發展的體系。主要表現在後設認知知識的重塑、後設認知策略的積極使用及後設認知經驗的不斷精確化。同時，研究結果也進一步證實了後設認知能力兼具認知、情感和社會文化三大屬性。學生博文的質性數據結合前後測的量化數據結果表明，後設認知輔助教學對學習者學術素養能力的培養有正向促進作用。課後調查的量化數據進一步指出，通過學術英語課程，學習者在以下三個面向均有進步：本課程中涉及的以讀促寫任務相關的策略知識和實際應用；語篇分析知識及讀寫結合的意識的培養。最後通過課後評價，學習者普遍表現出對後設認知輔助教學的認可及對未來自主學習的積極影響。
研究結果表明，後設認知能力對語言學習者而言是一筆寶貴的財富，對於了解學習者的思維過程有著巨大的潛力。本研究指出四個教學啟示供未來研究參考。第一，後設認知本質上具有生成的、有動態適應力的、及社會情境化的特點。因此，未來亟需將其研究放入各式具體領域的教學場景中考察。第二，教師在學習者後設認知能力的動態發展過程中起到重要的媒介作用，未來應予以更多關注。原因在於，相比其認知屬性，社會文化屬性在後設認知輔助教學框架中能得到充分的發展，並能與情感屬性的發展發生積極交互。第三，目前該領域較為忽視的數字化媒介應引起更多重視。例如博文作為數字化媒介手段之一，不僅充當後設能力測試的重要工具，也兼具後設認知活動的雙重功能。
In the past decades, there has been an appeal for metacognition research in the context of second language teaching and learning (Zhang, 2018, 2019) as a new lens to a deepened understanding of language learner strategies (LLSs) research. Informed by Flavell’s (1976, 1979) tripartite framework of metacognition and initiated by the first practitioner (Wenden, 1987a, 1998), a dramatic burgeoning of research efforts have been made on raising learners’ metacognitive awareness of using LLSs to acquire language skills. Yet, the rise of a communicative approach to language teaching and learning calls for the inquires of metacognition “in the context of authentic literacy engagement” (Baker, 2006, p. 74). Given that, the investigation of metacognition in the present study was contextualized in a reading-to-write-based EAP course named Reading-writing Integrated Academic English. The current research has three primary goals. First and foremost, the study aims at exploring the development of the Chinese EFL learners’ metacognitive competence in the course with the aid of metacognitive-scaffolded instruction. Second, it investigates the development of academic literacy skills by virtue of metacognitive instruction. Last, it examines the learners’ attitudes towards metacognitive instruction.
In this multiple-case study, qualitative data from the blog posts revealed the participants’ metacognitive growth as a result of interactive processes of reshaped metacognitive knowledge, active use of metacognitive strategies and increasingly accurate metacognitive experiences in a set of a dynamic system over the course. The findings also attested to the cognitive, affective and sociocultural nature of metacognition. Qualitative data from blog posts combined with quantitative data yielded from the pre-/post- summary writing tests proved that metacognitive instruction promoted the growth of academic literacy skills in the learners. Furthermore, data from the post-course survey confirmed three dimensions intended for the EAP course: strategy knowledge/use for the given reading-to-write tasks, knowledge of discourse analysis and the awareness of reading-writing connection. Data from the post-course evaluation lent support to the participant’s positive attitudes towards metacognitive instruction in general.
The findings and results suggest that metacognitive competence is a valuable asset for language learners and has untapped potential to contribute to the understanding of how learners learn to reason. The major pedagogical implications for future research include several directions. First, there is an urgent need of situating the studies of metacognition in a wider variety of specific-domain teaching settings considering this construct is emergent, dynamically adaptive and socially situated in essence. Second, the teacher’s central mediating role in the dynamics of metacognitive growth should be more emphasized as it can work best within L2 metacognitive instruction as the sociocultural nature of metacognition is equally important as its cognitive nature and can actively interact with its affective nature. Third, what has thus far been neglected is the digitalized mediators (e.g. blog posts) that can be utilized as assessment tools and metacognitive activities to foster metacognition.
參考文獻 References

Anderson, N. J. (2002). The Role of Metacognition in Second Language Teaching and Learning. ERIC Digest. http://www.cal.org/ericcll//DIGEST
Anderson, D., Nashon, S. M., & Thomas, G. P. (2009). Evolution of research methods for probing and understanding metacognition. Research in Science Education, 39(2), 181-195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9078-1
Azevedo, R. (2020). Reflections on the field of metacognition: Issues, challenges, and opportunities. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 91-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09231-x
Baker, L. (2006). Developmental differences in metacognition: Implications for metacognitively oriented reading instruction. In Metacognition in Literacy Learning (pp. 83-102). Routledge.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586.
Blank, L. M. (2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding?. Science Education, 84(4), 486-506.
Brown, A. L., & DeLoache, J. S. (1978). Skills, plans, and self-regulation. Children`s thinking: What develops, 2.
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, 65-116.
Carrell, P. L., & Connor, U. (1991). Reading and writing descriptive and persuasive texts. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 314-324. https://www.jstor.org/stable/328725
Casanave, C. P. (1988). Comprehension monitoring in ESL reading: A neglected essential. TESOL Quarterly, 22(2), 283-302. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3586937
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). Language learner and learning strategies. Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages, 371-392.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. sage.
Cleary, M. N. (2013). Flowing and freestyling: Learning from adult students about process knowledge transfer. College Composition and Communication, 661-687. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43490784
Cohen, A. D., & Griffiths, C. (2015). Revisiting LLS research 40 years later. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 414-429. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43893760
Connor, C. M., Day, S. L., Zargar, E., Wood, T. S., Taylor, K. S., Jones, M. R., & Hwang, J. K. (2019). Building word knowledge, learning strategies, and metacognition with the Word-Knowledge e-Book. Computers & Education, 128, 284-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.016
Conner, L. N. (2007). Cueing metacognition to improve researching and essay writing in a final year high school biology class. Research in Science Education, 37(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-3952-x
Cordeiro, C., Limpo, T., Olive, T., & Castro, S. L. (2020). Do executive functions contribute to writing quality in beginning writers? A longitudinal study with second graders. Reading and Writing, 33(4), 813-833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09963-6
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Steps in conducting a scholarly mixed methods study. BER Spearker Series. 48. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dberspeakers/48
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
Cross, J. (2010). Raising L2 listeners’ metacognitive awareness: A sociocultural theory perspective. Language Awareness, 19(4), 281-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2010.519033
Crowhurst, M. (1991). Interrelationships between reading and writing persuasive discourse. Research in the Teaching of English, 314-338. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171415
Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K., & James, M. (2005). Differences in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype tasks for next generation TOEFL. Assessing Writing, 10(1), 5-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2005.02.001
Dabarera, C., Renandya, W. A., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The impact of metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension. System, 42, 462-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.020
Davidowitz, B., & Rollnick, M. (2003). Enabling metacognition in the laboratory: A case study of four second year university chemistry students. Research in Science Education, 33(1), 43-69. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023673122220
de Blume, A. P. G., Wells, P., Davis, C. A., & Parker, J. (2017). " You can sort of feel it": Exploring metacognition and the feeling of knowing among undergraduate students. The Qualitative Report, 22(7), 2016-2033.
Delaney, Y. A. (2008). Investigating the reading-to-write construct. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(3), 140-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.04.001
DePalma, M.J., & Ringer, J. M. (2011). Toward a theory of adaptive transfer: Expanding disciplinary discussions of “transfer” in second-language writing and composition studies. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 134-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.02.003
Desoete, A., Roeyers, H., & De Clercq, A. (2003). Can offline metacognition enhance mathematical problem solving?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 188. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.188
Duff, P. (2018). Case study research in applied linguistics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203827147
Duffy, G. G. (2006). Developing metacognitive teachers: Visioning and the expert’s changing role in teacher education and professional development. In Metacognition in literacy learning (pp. 321-336). Routledge.
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01235
Efklides, A., Samara, A., & Petropoulou, M. (1999). Feeling of difficulty: An aspect of monitoring that influences control. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14(4), 461-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172973
Efklides, A. (2001). Metacognitive experiences in problem solving: Metacognition, motivation, and self-regulation. In A. Efklides, J. Kuhl, & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Trends and prospects in motivation research (pp. 297-323). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Efklides, A. (2002). The systemic nature of metacognitive experiences. In Metacognition (pp. 19-34). Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1099-4_2
Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: What can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process?. Educational Research Review, 1(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. Perspectives on Activity Theory, 19(38), 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1017/CB09780511812774.003
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. the MIT Press.
Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_5
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. The Nature of Intelligence.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
Forgas, J. P. (1994). The role of emotion in social judgments: An introductory review and an Affect Infusion Model (AIM). European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420240102
Ferris, D. (2009). Teaching college writing to diverse student populations. University of Michigan Press.
Fetterman, D. M. (2008). Emic/etic distinction. The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, 1, 249.
Gao, X. (2007). Has language learning strategy research come to an end? A response to Tseng et al. (2006). Applied Linguistics, 28(4), 615-620. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm034
Gao, X., & Zhang, L. J. (2011). 3. Joining Forces for Synergy: Agency and Metacognition as Interrelated Theoretical Perspectives on Learner Autonomy (pp. 25-41). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847693747-004
Georghiades, P. (2004). From the general to the situated: Three decades of metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 365-383. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119401
Georghiades, P. (2006). The role of metacognitive activities in the contextual use of primary pupils` conceptions of science. Research in Science Education, 36(1), 29-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-3954-8
Goh, C. (2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice and research implications. RELC journal, 39(2), 188-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688208092184
Goh, C. C., & Hu, G. (2014). Exploring the relationship between metacognitive awareness and listening performance with questionnaire data. Language Awareness, 23(3), 255-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.769558
Gutierrez de Blume, A. P. G., Wells, P., Davis, C. A., & Parker, J. (2017). " You can sort of feel it": Exploring metacognition and the feeling of knowing among undergraduate students. The Qualitative Report, 22(7), 2016-2033. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2017.2802
Grabe, W. (2001). Reading-writing relations: Theoretical perspectives and instructional practices. Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 Reading-writing Connections, 15-47
Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2016). Reading-writing relationships in first and second language academic literacy development. Language Teaching, 49(3), 339-355. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000082
Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2013). Second language reading-writing relations. Reconnecting Reading & Writing, 108-133.
Greene, S. (1992). Mining texts in reading to write. Journal of Advanced Composition, 151-170. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20865834
Greene, S. (1993). The role of task in the development of academic thinking through reading and writing in a college history course. Research in the Teaching of English, 46-75. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171212
Griffin, T. D., Mielicki, M. K., & Wiley, J. (2019). Improving students’ metacomprehension accuracy.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of Qualitative research, 2(163-194), 105.
Haas, C., & Flower, L. (1988). Rhetorical reading strategies and the construction of meaning. College Composition and Communication, 39(2), 167-183. https://www.jstor.org/stable/358026
Hacker, D. J. (2018). A metacognitive model of writing: An update from a developmental perspective. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 220-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1480373
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2017). Self-regulated strategy development: Theoretical bases, critical instructional elements, and future research. In Design principles for teaching effective writing (pp. 119-151). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004270480_007
Hertzog, C., & Dixon, R. A. (1994). Metacognitive development in adulthood and old age. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing (pp. 227-251. The MIT Press.
El-Hindi, A. E. (1997). Connecting reading and writing: College learners` metacognitive awareness. Journal of Developmental Education, 21(2), 10.
Heigham, J., & Croker, R. (Eds.). (2009). Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction. Springer.
Hinkel, E. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching the four skills. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 109-131. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264513
Hirvela, A. (2004). Connecting reading & writing in second language writing instruction. University of Michigan Press.
Hirvela, A., & Du, Q. (2013). “Why am I paraphrasing?”: Undergraduate ESL writers` engagement with source-based academic writing and reading. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(2), 87-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.005
Hu, J., & Gao, X. (2018). Self-regulated strategic writing for academic studies in an English-medium-instruction context. Language and Education, 32(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2017.1373804
Hsiao, T. Y., & Oxford, R. L. (2002). Comparing theories of language learning strategies: A confirmatory factor analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00155
Hyland, K. (2001). Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication, 18(4), 549-574. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088301018004005
Jafarigohar, M., & Mortazavi, M. (2017). The impact of scaffolding mechanisms on EFL learners’ individual and socially shared metacognition in writing. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 33(3), 211-225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2016.1154488
Kaplan, A. (2008). Clarifying metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: What’s the purpse?. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 477-484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9087-2
Keck, C. (2006). The use of paraphrase in summary writing: A comparison of L1 and L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(4), 261-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.006
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. Cambridge University Press.
Koda, K., & Zehler, A. M. (Eds.). (2008). Learning to read across languages: Cross-linguistic relationships in first-and second-language literacy development. Routledge.
Koriat, A., & Levy-Sadot, R. (2000). Conscious and unconscious metacognition: A rejoinder. Consciousness and Cognition, 9(2), 193-202. https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.2000.0436
Kramsch, C. (1997). Rhetorical models of understanding. Functional approaches to written text: Classroom applications, 50-63.
Lamb, T. (2017). Knowledge about language and learner autonomy. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02240-6_14
Lam, W. Y. (2010). Metacognitive strategy teaching in the ESL oral classroom: Ripple effect on non-target strategy use. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(1), 2-1. https://doi.org/10.2104/aral1002
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2013). Transfer of learning transformed. Language Learning, 63, 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00740.x
Lee, I., & Mak, P. (2018). Metacognition and metacognitive instruction in second language writing classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 1085-1097. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44987051
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). “Completely different worlds”: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 39-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587974
Lei, X. (2008). Exploring a sociocultural approach to writing strategy research: Mediated actions in writing activities. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 217-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.04.001
Lei, X. (2016). Understanding writing strategy use from a sociocultural perspective: The case of skilled and less skilled writers. System, 60, 105-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.06.006
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. sage. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosn006
Little, D. (2007). Language learner autonomy: Some fundamental considerations revisited. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 14-29. https://doi.org/10.2167/illt040.0
Littlewood, W. (1996). “Autonomy”: An anatomy and a framework. System, 24(4), 427-435.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(96)00039-5
Loban, W. (1963). The language of elementary school children.
Lompscher, J. (1994). Learning strategies: An essential component of learning activity. LLF-Berichte/Universität Potsdam, Zentrum für Lehrerbildung, 7.
Macaro, E. (2006). Strategies for language learning and for language use: Revising the theoretical framework. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 320-337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00425.x
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback?. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 471-497. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004010
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. Jossey-Bass.
McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers (Vol. 65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/02656590920080010
McCombs, B. L., & Marzano, R. J. (1990). Putting the self in self-regulated learning: The self as agent in integrating will and skill. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 51-69. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_5
McCulloch, S. (2013). Investigating the reading-to-write processes and source use of L2 postgraduate students in real-life academic tasks: An exploratory study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(2), 136-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.009
McVee, M. B., Bailey, N. M., & Shanahan, L. E. (2008). Teachers and teacher educators learning from new literacies and new technologies. Teaching Education, 19(3), 197-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210802250216
Mežek, Š., McGrath, L., Negretti, R., & Berggren, J. (2022). Scaffolding L2 Academic Reading and Self‐Regulation Through Task and Feedback. TESOL Quarterly, 56(1), 41-67. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3018
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.249
Murray, D. M. (1982). Teaching the other self: The writer`s first reader. College Composition and Communication, 33(2), 140-147. https://www.jstor.org/stable/357621
Negretti, R. (2012). Metacognition in student academic writing: A longitudinal study of metacognitive awareness and its relation to task perception, self-regulation, and evaluation of performance. Written Communication, 29(2), 142-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312438529
Negretti, R., & Kuteeva, M. (2011). Fostering metacognitive genre awareness in L2 academic reading and writing: A case study of pre-service English teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.02.002
Negretti, R., & McGrath, L. (2018). Scaffolding genre knowledge and metacognition: Insights from an L2 doctoral research writing course. Journal of Second Language Writing, 40, 12-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.12.002
Nelson, T. O. (1996). Consciousness and metacognition. American psychologist, 51(2), 102.
Nelson, N., & Calfee, R. C. (Eds.). (1998). The reading-writing connection (Vol. 972). University of Chicago Press.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition. Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing, 13, 1-25.
Nelson, N. (2008). The reading-writing nexus in discourse research. In C. Bazerman (Ed.), Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text (pp. 435-450). Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nowacek, R. S. (2011). Agents of integration: Understanding transfer as a rhetorical act. SIU Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43501837
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies-What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle.
Paris, S. G. (2002). When is metacognition helpful, debilitating, or benign?. In Metacognition (pp. 105-120). Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1099-4_8
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1992). Transfer of learning. International Encyclopedia of Education, 2, 6452-6457.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, S (Eds.) (2002). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington DC: National Research Center. https://doi.org/10.17226/10019
Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). 2. assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
Plakans, L. (2009). The role of reading strategies in integrated L2 writing tasks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 252-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.05.001
Plakans, L. (2010). Independent vs. integrated writing tasks: A comparison of task representation. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 185-194. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27785076
Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2012). A close investigation into source use in integrated second language writing tasks. Assessing Writing, 17(1), 18-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.09.002
Polio, C., & Shi, L. (2012). Perceptions and beliefs about textual appropriation and source use in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(2), 95-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.001
Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., & Schneider, W. (1987). Cognitive strategies: Good strategy users coordinate metacognition and knowledge.
Prior, P. (2006). A sociocultural theory of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 54-66). The Guilford Press.
Richa, N., & Geiger, S. (2007). Reflexivity and positionality in feminist fieldwork revisited. Politics and Practice in Economic Geography, A. Tickell, E. Sheppard, J. Peck, T. Barnes (eds.), 267-278.
Ruan, Z. (2014). Metacognitive awareness of EFL student writers in a Chinese ELT context. Language Awareness, 23(1-2), 76-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.863901
Sandelowski, M. (1995). Qualitative analysis: What it is and how to begin. Research in Nursing & Health, 18(4), 371-375. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.4770180411
Sawaki, Y., Quinlan, T., & Lee, Y. W. (2013). Understanding learner strengths and weaknesses: Assessing performance on an integrated writing task. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(1), 73-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.633305
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1987). Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition. Advances in Applied Psycholinguistics, 2, 142-175.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033
Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 3-16). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2243-8_1
Selfe, C. L. (1986). Computer-Assisted Instruction in Composition: Create Your Own. National Council of Teachers of English, 1111 Kenyon Rd., Urbana, IL 61801 (Stock No. 08418, $12.00 member, $15.00 nonmember).
Serra, M. J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Effective implementation of metacognition. In Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 278-298). Routledge.
Shanahan, T. (1984). Nature of the reading–writing relation: An exploratory multivariate analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(3), 466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.3.466
Shanahan, T., & Lomax, R. G. (1986). An analysis and comparison of theoretical models of the reading–writing relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 116. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.78.2.116
Shaw, P., & Pecorari, D. (2013). Types of intertextuality in Chairman’s statements. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 12(1), 37-64.
Shi, L. (2004). Textual borrowing in second-language writing. Written Communication, 21(2), 171-200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088303262846
Shi, L. (2010). Textual appropriation and citing behaviors of university undergraduates. Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn045
Shin, S. Y., & Ewert, D. (2015). What accounts for integrated reading-to-write task scores?. Language Testing, 32(2), 259-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214560257
Smith, F. (1983). Reading like a writer. Language Arts, 60, 558-567
Spack, R. (1997). The acquisition of academic literacy in a second language: A longitudinal case study. Written Communication, 14(1), 3-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883970140010
Spivey, N. N. (1990). Transforming texts: Constructive processes in reading and writing. Written Communication, 7(2), 256-287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088390007002004
Spivey, N. N. (1996). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing and the making of meaning. In The Constructivist Metaphor. Brill.
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stanovich, K. E. (1990). Concepts in developmental theories of reading skill: Cognitive resources, automaticity, and modularity. Developmental Review, 10(1), 72-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(90)90005-O
Tarricone, P. (2011). The taxonomy of metacognition. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830529
Teng, M. F., Qin, C., & Wang, C. (2022). Validation of metacognitive academic writing strategies and the predictive effects on academic writing performance in a foreign language context. Metacognition and Learning, 17(1), 167-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09278-4
Thomas, G. P. (1999). Developing metacognition and cognitive strategies through the use of metaphor in a year 11 chemistry classroom (Doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology)
Thomas, G., Anderson, D., & Nashon, S. (2008). Development of an instrument designed to investigate elements of science students’ metacognition, self-efficacy and learning processes: The SEMLI-S. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1701-1724. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701482493
Thomas, G. P. (2003). Conceptualisation, development and validation of an instrument for investigating the metacognitive orientation of science classroom learning environments: The Metacognitive Orientation Learning Environment Scale–Science (MOLES-S). Learning Environments Research, 6(2), 175-197. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024943103341
Thomas, G. P., & McRobbie, C. J. (2001). Using a metaphor for learning to improve students` metacognition in the chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 222-259.https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2<222::AID-TEA1004>3.0.CO;2-S
Thomas, G. P. (2012). Metacognition in science education: Past, present and future considerations. In Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 131-144). Springer, Dordrecht.
Tierney, R. J., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading–writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Tseng, W. T., Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2006). A new approach to assessing strategic learning: The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 78-102. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami046
Ushioda, E. (2014). Motivation, autonomy and metacognition. Motivation and foreign language learning: From theory to practice, 31-49.
Veenman, M. V., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). Intellectual and metacognitive skills of novices while studying texts under conditions of text difficulty and time constraint. Learning and Instruction, 14(6), 621-640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.09.004
Veenman, M. V., Hout-Wolters, V., Bernadette, H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0
Vandergrift, L., Goh, C. C., Mareschal, C. J., & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2006). The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation. Language Learning, 56(3), 431-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.x
Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. C. (2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429287749
Van de Kamp, M. T., Admiraal, W., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2016). Becoming original: effects of strategy instruction. Instructional Science, 44(6), 543-566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9384-y
Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1990). What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. The Journal of Educational Research, 84(1), 30-43. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40539680
Watanabe, Y. (2001). Read-to-write tasks for the assessment of second language academic writing skills: Investigating text features and rater reactions. University of Hawai`i at Manoa.
Wenden, A. (1987). Metacognition: An expanded view on the cognitive abilities of L2 learners. Language Learning, 37(4), 573-597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1987.tb00585.x
Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning1. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515-537. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.4.515
Wenden, A. L. (2001). Metacognitive knowledge in SLA: The neglected variable. Learner contributions to language learning: New directions in research, 44-64.
Whittlesea, B. W. (1993). Illusions of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(6), 1235.
Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Sage.
Wong, M. Y. (2005). Metacognitive awareness and usage (Doctoral dissertation).
Yang, H. C., & Plakans, L. (2012). Second language writers’ strategy use and performance on an integrated reading-listening-writing task. TESOL Quarterly, 46(1), 80-103. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.6
Yin, R. K. (2013). Design and methods. Case Study Research, 3(9.2)
Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative research methods, 5(14), 359-386.
Yuan, R., & Zhang, L. J. (2020). Teacher metacognitions about identities: Case studies of four expert language teachers in China. TESOL Quarterly, 54(4), 870-899. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.561
Zhang, D., & Goh, C. C. (2006). Strategy knowledge and perceived strategy use: Singaporean students’ awareness of listening and speaking strategies. Language Awareness, 15(3), 199-119. https://doi.org/10.2167/la342.0
Zhang, L. J., (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students` metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10(4), 268-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410108667039
Zhang, L. J., & Qin, T. L. (2018). Validating a questionnaire on EFL writers’ metacognitive awareness of writing strategies in multimedia environments. In Metacognition in language learning and teaching (pp. 157-178). Routledge.
Zhang, D., & Zhang, L. J. (2019). Metacognition and self-regulated learning (SRL) in second/foreign language teaching. Second handbook of English language teaching, 883-897. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_47
Zhang, L. J., & Zhang, D. (2018). Metacognition in TESOL: Theory and practice. The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0803
Zhang, L. J., & Zhang, D. (2013). Thinking metacognitively about metacognition in second and foreign language learning, teaching, and research: Toward a dynamic metacognitive systems perspective. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 396(12), 111-121.
Zhang, L. J. (2010). A dynamic metacognitive systems account of Chinese university students` knowledge about EFL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 320-353. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.223352
Zhao, C. G., & Liao, L. (2021). Metacognitive strategy use in L2 writing assessment. System, 98, 10247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102472
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(2), 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.51
描述 博士
國立政治大學
英國語文學系
107551505
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107551505
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 許麗媛zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Hsu, Li-Yuanen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 王畇zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Wang, Yunen_US
dc.creator (作者) 王畇zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Wang, Yunen_US
dc.date (日期) 2023en_US
dc.date.accessioned 9-Mar-2023 18:23:48 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 9-Mar-2023 18:23:48 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 9-Mar-2023 18:23:48 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0107551505en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/143776-
dc.description (描述) 博士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 英國語文學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 107551505zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近些年來，學界呼籲將後設認知這一概念的研究納入二語教學的領域（Zhang, 2018, 2019）， 以此作為深入了解語言學習者策略的新視角。在Flavell（1976, 1979）理論框架的指導下，Wenden（1987a, 1998）引領外語教學屆圍繞“通過提升後設認知意識使用學習策略從而更好地習得語言技能”展開了大量的研究。然而，交際教學法在二語屆的興起要求將後設認知的研究置於真實語言情境中。藉此，本文對後設認知概念的探討置於以讀促寫任務為導向的學術英語課程中進行。本文的研究重點有三。首先，在後設認知輔助教學的環境中探討中國英語學習者通過學術英語課程發展後設認知能力。其次，考察同等條件下學術素養技能的發展。最後，了解學生對後設認知輔助教學的普遍態度。
在多個案研究場景下，通過對學生博文的質性數據的分析，本研究展示了研究參與者後設認知能力的成長軌跡。在課程進行中，後設認知能力的三個重要面向交互影響，呈現動態發展的體系。主要表現在後設認知知識的重塑、後設認知策略的積極使用及後設認知經驗的不斷精確化。同時，研究結果也進一步證實了後設認知能力兼具認知、情感和社會文化三大屬性。學生博文的質性數據結合前後測的量化數據結果表明，後設認知輔助教學對學習者學術素養能力的培養有正向促進作用。課後調查的量化數據進一步指出，通過學術英語課程，學習者在以下三個面向均有進步：本課程中涉及的以讀促寫任務相關的策略知識和實際應用；語篇分析知識及讀寫結合的意識的培養。最後通過課後評價，學習者普遍表現出對後設認知輔助教學的認可及對未來自主學習的積極影響。
研究結果表明，後設認知能力對語言學習者而言是一筆寶貴的財富，對於了解學習者的思維過程有著巨大的潛力。本研究指出四個教學啟示供未來研究參考。第一，後設認知本質上具有生成的、有動態適應力的、及社會情境化的特點。因此，未來亟需將其研究放入各式具體領域的教學場景中考察。第二，教師在學習者後設認知能力的動態發展過程中起到重要的媒介作用，未來應予以更多關注。原因在於，相比其認知屬性，社會文化屬性在後設認知輔助教學框架中能得到充分的發展，並能與情感屬性的發展發生積極交互。第三，目前該領域較為忽視的數字化媒介應引起更多重視。例如博文作為數字化媒介手段之一，不僅充當後設能力測試的重要工具，也兼具後設認知活動的雙重功能。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) In the past decades, there has been an appeal for metacognition research in the context of second language teaching and learning (Zhang, 2018, 2019) as a new lens to a deepened understanding of language learner strategies (LLSs) research. Informed by Flavell’s (1976, 1979) tripartite framework of metacognition and initiated by the first practitioner (Wenden, 1987a, 1998), a dramatic burgeoning of research efforts have been made on raising learners’ metacognitive awareness of using LLSs to acquire language skills. Yet, the rise of a communicative approach to language teaching and learning calls for the inquires of metacognition “in the context of authentic literacy engagement” (Baker, 2006, p. 74). Given that, the investigation of metacognition in the present study was contextualized in a reading-to-write-based EAP course named Reading-writing Integrated Academic English. The current research has three primary goals. First and foremost, the study aims at exploring the development of the Chinese EFL learners’ metacognitive competence in the course with the aid of metacognitive-scaffolded instruction. Second, it investigates the development of academic literacy skills by virtue of metacognitive instruction. Last, it examines the learners’ attitudes towards metacognitive instruction.
In this multiple-case study, qualitative data from the blog posts revealed the participants’ metacognitive growth as a result of interactive processes of reshaped metacognitive knowledge, active use of metacognitive strategies and increasingly accurate metacognitive experiences in a set of a dynamic system over the course. The findings also attested to the cognitive, affective and sociocultural nature of metacognition. Qualitative data from blog posts combined with quantitative data yielded from the pre-/post- summary writing tests proved that metacognitive instruction promoted the growth of academic literacy skills in the learners. Furthermore, data from the post-course survey confirmed three dimensions intended for the EAP course: strategy knowledge/use for the given reading-to-write tasks, knowledge of discourse analysis and the awareness of reading-writing connection. Data from the post-course evaluation lent support to the participant’s positive attitudes towards metacognitive instruction in general.
The findings and results suggest that metacognitive competence is a valuable asset for language learners and has untapped potential to contribute to the understanding of how learners learn to reason. The major pedagogical implications for future research include several directions. First, there is an urgent need of situating the studies of metacognition in a wider variety of specific-domain teaching settings considering this construct is emergent, dynamically adaptive and socially situated in essence. Second, the teacher’s central mediating role in the dynamics of metacognitive growth should be more emphasized as it can work best within L2 metacognitive instruction as the sociocultural nature of metacognition is equally important as its cognitive nature and can actively interact with its affective nature. Third, what has thus far been neglected is the digitalized mediators (e.g. blog posts) that can be utilized as assessment tools and metacognitive activities to foster metacognition.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IV
LIST OF TABLES IX
LIST OF FIGURES X
CHINESE ABSTRACT XI
ABSTRACT XIII
INTRODUCTION 1
BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY 1
RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY 3
RESEARCH QUESTIONS 5
DEFINITION OF TERMS 6
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 7
LITERATURE REVIEW 9
METACOGNITION AS A MULTIFACETED AND COMPLEX CONSTRUCT 9
Cognitive Nature of Metacognition 9
Affective Nature of Metacognition 15
Sociocultural Nature of Metacognition 17
Application of Metacognition in L2 Pedagogy 18
CONNECTING READING AND WRITING 25
Theoretical Frameworks for Reading-Writing Connections in L1 25
L2 Scholarship on Reading-Writing Connections 28
METHODOLOGY 35
THE CONTEXT OF THE STUDY 36
THE SETTING 37
THE PARTICIPANTS 38
THE RESEARCHER’S POSITIONALITY 38
THE COURSE 39
Basic Information of the Course 39
Features of the Course 40
Teaching Approach and Procedures of the Course 41
The Reading-to-write Tasks 46
DATA COLLECTION 47
Data Sources 47
Procedures of Data Collection 52
DATA ANALYSIS 53
Analysis of Qualitative Data 53
Analysis of Quantitative Data 58
Procedures of Trustworthiness 59
FINDINGS AND RESULTS 62
FINDINGS RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF METACOGNITIVE COMPETENCE 62
Development of Metacognitive Knowledge 63
Development of Metacognitive Strategies 77
Development of Metacognitive Experiences 84
Summary of Findings of Research Question One 89
FINDINGS AND RESULTS RELATED TO THE ACADEMIC LITERACY SKILLS 89
Findings Deriving from the Blog-posts 89
Results Deriving from the Pre- and Post-tests 95
Results Deriving from the Post-course Self-evaluation Survey 96
Summary of Results of Research Question Two 103
RESULTS RELATED TO THE LEARNERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS METACOGNITIVE-INSTRUCTION 103
DISCUSSION 109
METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE: A PREREQUISITE FOR SELF-REGULATED LEARNING AND STRATEGY USE 109
METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES: AN APPROACH TO FOSTERING METACOGNITION 112
METACOGNITIVE EXPERIENCES: CONCURRENT METACOGNITION 116
Feelings and Judgements 116
Metacognitive Conflicts Resulting from Reflections 117
SHARPENED ACADEMIC LITERACY SKILLS THROUGH METACOGNITIVE INSTRUCTION 118
Knowledge of Paraphrasing Writing and Strategy Use 119
Knowledge of Summary Writing and Strategy Use 121
Knowledge of Discourse Analysis 122
Knowledge of Reading-Writing Connection 123
CONCLUSIONS 127
MAJOR FINDINGS 127
IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY 129
Being a Metacognitively-aware Teacher 129
Implementing Metacognitively-scaffolded Instruction 130
Blog-writing as an Assessment Tool and Metacognitive Activity 131
Sociocultural Nature of the Metacognition Construct 132
Generality-Specificity of Metacognition 132
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 133
DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 134
CONCLUDING REMARKS 136
REFERENCES 137
APPENDIXES 157		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 2066378 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107551505en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 後設認知能力的培養zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 後設認知的認知、情感和社會文化屬性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 以讀促寫zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學術素養能力的培養zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 後設認知支架教學zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Development of metacognitive competenceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cognitive, affective and sociocultural nature of metacognitionen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Reading-based writingen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Development of academic literacy skillsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Metacognitively-scaffolded instructionen_US
dc.title (題名) 透過學術英語讀寫課程發展中國大學生後設認知能力之個案研究zh_TW
dc.title (題名) A Case Study on Developing Chinese University Students’ Metacognitive Competence through a Reading-to-write EAP Courseen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) References

Anderson, N. J. (2002). The Role of Metacognition in Second Language Teaching and Learning. ERIC Digest. http://www.cal.org/ericcll//DIGEST
Anderson, D., Nashon, S. M., & Thomas, G. P. (2009). Evolution of research methods for probing and understanding metacognition. Research in Science Education, 39(2), 181-195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9078-1
Azevedo, R. (2020). Reflections on the field of metacognition: Issues, challenges, and opportunities. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 91-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09231-x
Baker, L. (2006). Developmental differences in metacognition: Implications for metacognitively oriented reading instruction. In Metacognition in Literacy Learning (pp. 83-102). Routledge.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586.
Blank, L. M. (2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding?. Science Education, 84(4), 486-506.
Brown, A. L., & DeLoache, J. S. (1978). Skills, plans, and self-regulation. Children`s thinking: What develops, 2.
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, 65-116.
Carrell, P. L., & Connor, U. (1991). Reading and writing descriptive and persuasive texts. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 314-324. https://www.jstor.org/stable/328725
Casanave, C. P. (1988). Comprehension monitoring in ESL reading: A neglected essential. TESOL Quarterly, 22(2), 283-302. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3586937
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). Language learner and learning strategies. Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages, 371-392.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. sage.
Cleary, M. N. (2013). Flowing and freestyling: Learning from adult students about process knowledge transfer. College Composition and Communication, 661-687. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43490784
Cohen, A. D., & Griffiths, C. (2015). Revisiting LLS research 40 years later. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 414-429. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43893760
Connor, C. M., Day, S. L., Zargar, E., Wood, T. S., Taylor, K. S., Jones, M. R., & Hwang, J. K. (2019). Building word knowledge, learning strategies, and metacognition with the Word-Knowledge e-Book. Computers & Education, 128, 284-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.016
Conner, L. N. (2007). Cueing metacognition to improve researching and essay writing in a final year high school biology class. Research in Science Education, 37(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-3952-x
Cordeiro, C., Limpo, T., Olive, T., & Castro, S. L. (2020). Do executive functions contribute to writing quality in beginning writers? A longitudinal study with second graders. Reading and Writing, 33(4), 813-833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09963-6
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Steps in conducting a scholarly mixed methods study. BER Spearker Series. 48. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dberspeakers/48
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
Cross, J. (2010). Raising L2 listeners’ metacognitive awareness: A sociocultural theory perspective. Language Awareness, 19(4), 281-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2010.519033
Crowhurst, M. (1991). Interrelationships between reading and writing persuasive discourse. Research in the Teaching of English, 314-338. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171415
Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K., & James, M. (2005). Differences in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype tasks for next generation TOEFL. Assessing Writing, 10(1), 5-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2005.02.001
Dabarera, C., Renandya, W. A., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The impact of metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension. System, 42, 462-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.020
Davidowitz, B., & Rollnick, M. (2003). Enabling metacognition in the laboratory: A case study of four second year university chemistry students. Research in Science Education, 33(1), 43-69. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023673122220
de Blume, A. P. G., Wells, P., Davis, C. A., & Parker, J. (2017). " You can sort of feel it": Exploring metacognition and the feeling of knowing among undergraduate students. The Qualitative Report, 22(7), 2016-2033.
Delaney, Y. A. (2008). Investigating the reading-to-write construct. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(3), 140-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.04.001
DePalma, M.J., & Ringer, J. M. (2011). Toward a theory of adaptive transfer: Expanding disciplinary discussions of “transfer” in second-language writing and composition studies. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 134-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.02.003
Desoete, A., Roeyers, H., & De Clercq, A. (2003). Can offline metacognition enhance mathematical problem solving?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 188. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.188
Duff, P. (2018). Case study research in applied linguistics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203827147
Duffy, G. G. (2006). Developing metacognitive teachers: Visioning and the expert’s changing role in teacher education and professional development. In Metacognition in literacy learning (pp. 321-336). Routledge.
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01235
Efklides, A., Samara, A., & Petropoulou, M. (1999). Feeling of difficulty: An aspect of monitoring that influences control. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14(4), 461-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172973
Efklides, A. (2001). Metacognitive experiences in problem solving: Metacognition, motivation, and self-regulation. In A. Efklides, J. Kuhl, & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Trends and prospects in motivation research (pp. 297-323). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Efklides, A. (2002). The systemic nature of metacognitive experiences. In Metacognition (pp. 19-34). Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1099-4_2
Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: What can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process?. Educational Research Review, 1(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. Perspectives on Activity Theory, 19(38), 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1017/CB09780511812774.003
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. the MIT Press.
Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_5
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. The Nature of Intelligence.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
Forgas, J. P. (1994). The role of emotion in social judgments: An introductory review and an Affect Infusion Model (AIM). European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420240102
Ferris, D. (2009). Teaching college writing to diverse student populations. University of Michigan Press.
Fetterman, D. M. (2008). Emic/etic distinction. The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, 1, 249.
Gao, X. (2007). Has language learning strategy research come to an end? A response to Tseng et al. (2006). Applied Linguistics, 28(4), 615-620. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm034
Gao, X., & Zhang, L. J. (2011). 3. Joining Forces for Synergy: Agency and Metacognition as Interrelated Theoretical Perspectives on Learner Autonomy (pp. 25-41). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847693747-004
Georghiades, P. (2004). From the general to the situated: Three decades of metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 365-383. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119401
Georghiades, P. (2006). The role of metacognitive activities in the contextual use of primary pupils` conceptions of science. Research in Science Education, 36(1), 29-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-3954-8
Goh, C. (2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice and research implications. RELC journal, 39(2), 188-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688208092184
Goh, C. C., & Hu, G. (2014). Exploring the relationship between metacognitive awareness and listening performance with questionnaire data. Language Awareness, 23(3), 255-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.769558
Gutierrez de Blume, A. P. G., Wells, P., Davis, C. A., & Parker, J. (2017). " You can sort of feel it": Exploring metacognition and the feeling of knowing among undergraduate students. The Qualitative Report, 22(7), 2016-2033. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2017.2802
Grabe, W. (2001). Reading-writing relations: Theoretical perspectives and instructional practices. Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 Reading-writing Connections, 15-47
Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2016). Reading-writing relationships in first and second language academic literacy development. Language Teaching, 49(3), 339-355. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000082
Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2013). Second language reading-writing relations. Reconnecting Reading & Writing, 108-133.
Greene, S. (1992). Mining texts in reading to write. Journal of Advanced Composition, 151-170. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20865834
Greene, S. (1993). The role of task in the development of academic thinking through reading and writing in a college history course. Research in the Teaching of English, 46-75. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171212
Griffin, T. D., Mielicki, M. K., & Wiley, J. (2019). Improving students’ metacomprehension accuracy.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of Qualitative research, 2(163-194), 105.
Haas, C., & Flower, L. (1988). Rhetorical reading strategies and the construction of meaning. College Composition and Communication, 39(2), 167-183. https://www.jstor.org/stable/358026
Hacker, D. J. (2018). A metacognitive model of writing: An update from a developmental perspective. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 220-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1480373
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2017). Self-regulated strategy development: Theoretical bases, critical instructional elements, and future research. In Design principles for teaching effective writing (pp. 119-151). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004270480_007
Hertzog, C., & Dixon, R. A. (1994). Metacognitive development in adulthood and old age. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing (pp. 227-251. The MIT Press.
El-Hindi, A. E. (1997). Connecting reading and writing: College learners` metacognitive awareness. Journal of Developmental Education, 21(2), 10.
Heigham, J., & Croker, R. (Eds.). (2009). Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction. Springer.
Hinkel, E. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching the four skills. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 109-131. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264513
Hirvela, A. (2004). Connecting reading & writing in second language writing instruction. University of Michigan Press.
Hirvela, A., & Du, Q. (2013). “Why am I paraphrasing?”: Undergraduate ESL writers` engagement with source-based academic writing and reading. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(2), 87-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.005
Hu, J., & Gao, X. (2018). Self-regulated strategic writing for academic studies in an English-medium-instruction context. Language and Education, 32(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2017.1373804
Hsiao, T. Y., & Oxford, R. L. (2002). Comparing theories of language learning strategies: A confirmatory factor analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00155
Hyland, K. (2001). Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication, 18(4), 549-574. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088301018004005
Jafarigohar, M., & Mortazavi, M. (2017). The impact of scaffolding mechanisms on EFL learners’ individual and socially shared metacognition in writing. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 33(3), 211-225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2016.1154488
Kaplan, A. (2008). Clarifying metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: What’s the purpse?. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 477-484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9087-2
Keck, C. (2006). The use of paraphrase in summary writing: A comparison of L1 and L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(4), 261-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.006
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. Cambridge University Press.
Koda, K., & Zehler, A. M. (Eds.). (2008). Learning to read across languages: Cross-linguistic relationships in first-and second-language literacy development. Routledge.
Koriat, A., & Levy-Sadot, R. (2000). Conscious and unconscious metacognition: A rejoinder. Consciousness and Cognition, 9(2), 193-202. https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.2000.0436
Kramsch, C. (1997). Rhetorical models of understanding. Functional approaches to written text: Classroom applications, 50-63.
Lamb, T. (2017). Knowledge about language and learner autonomy. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02240-6_14
Lam, W. Y. (2010). Metacognitive strategy teaching in the ESL oral classroom: Ripple effect on non-target strategy use. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(1), 2-1. https://doi.org/10.2104/aral1002
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2013). Transfer of learning transformed. Language Learning, 63, 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00740.x
Lee, I., & Mak, P. (2018). Metacognition and metacognitive instruction in second language writing classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 1085-1097. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44987051
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). “Completely different worlds”: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 39-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587974
Lei, X. (2008). Exploring a sociocultural approach to writing strategy research: Mediated actions in writing activities. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 217-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.04.001
Lei, X. (2016). Understanding writing strategy use from a sociocultural perspective: The case of skilled and less skilled writers. System, 60, 105-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.06.006
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. sage. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosn006
Little, D. (2007). Language learner autonomy: Some fundamental considerations revisited. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 14-29. https://doi.org/10.2167/illt040.0
Littlewood, W. (1996). “Autonomy”: An anatomy and a framework. System, 24(4), 427-435.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(96)00039-5
Loban, W. (1963). The language of elementary school children.
Lompscher, J. (1994). Learning strategies: An essential component of learning activity. LLF-Berichte/Universität Potsdam, Zentrum für Lehrerbildung, 7.
Macaro, E. (2006). Strategies for language learning and for language use: Revising the theoretical framework. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 320-337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00425.x
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback?. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 471-497. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004010
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. Jossey-Bass.
McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers (Vol. 65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/02656590920080010
McCombs, B. L., & Marzano, R. J. (1990). Putting the self in self-regulated learning: The self as agent in integrating will and skill. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 51-69. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_5
McCulloch, S. (2013). Investigating the reading-to-write processes and source use of L2 postgraduate students in real-life academic tasks: An exploratory study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(2), 136-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.009
McVee, M. B., Bailey, N. M., & Shanahan, L. E. (2008). Teachers and teacher educators learning from new literacies and new technologies. Teaching Education, 19(3), 197-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210802250216
Mežek, Š., McGrath, L., Negretti, R., & Berggren, J. (2022). Scaffolding L2 Academic Reading and Self‐Regulation Through Task and Feedback. TESOL Quarterly, 56(1), 41-67. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3018
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.249
Murray, D. M. (1982). Teaching the other self: The writer`s first reader. College Composition and Communication, 33(2), 140-147. https://www.jstor.org/stable/357621
Negretti, R. (2012). Metacognition in student academic writing: A longitudinal study of metacognitive awareness and its relation to task perception, self-regulation, and evaluation of performance. Written Communication, 29(2), 142-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312438529
Negretti, R., & Kuteeva, M. (2011). Fostering metacognitive genre awareness in L2 academic reading and writing: A case study of pre-service English teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.02.002
Negretti, R., & McGrath, L. (2018). Scaffolding genre knowledge and metacognition: Insights from an L2 doctoral research writing course. Journal of Second Language Writing, 40, 12-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.12.002
Nelson, T. O. (1996). Consciousness and metacognition. American psychologist, 51(2), 102.
Nelson, N., & Calfee, R. C. (Eds.). (1998). The reading-writing connection (Vol. 972). University of Chicago Press.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition. Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing, 13, 1-25.
Nelson, N. (2008). The reading-writing nexus in discourse research. In C. Bazerman (Ed.), Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text (pp. 435-450). Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nowacek, R. S. (2011). Agents of integration: Understanding transfer as a rhetorical act. SIU Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43501837
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies-What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle.
Paris, S. G. (2002). When is metacognition helpful, debilitating, or benign?. In Metacognition (pp. 105-120). Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1099-4_8
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1992). Transfer of learning. International Encyclopedia of Education, 2, 6452-6457.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, S (Eds.) (2002). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington DC: National Research Center. https://doi.org/10.17226/10019
Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). 2. assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
Plakans, L. (2009). The role of reading strategies in integrated L2 writing tasks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 252-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.05.001
Plakans, L. (2010). Independent vs. integrated writing tasks: A comparison of task representation. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 185-194. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27785076
Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2012). A close investigation into source use in integrated second language writing tasks. Assessing Writing, 17(1), 18-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.09.002
Polio, C., & Shi, L. (2012). Perceptions and beliefs about textual appropriation and source use in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(2), 95-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.001
Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., & Schneider, W. (1987). Cognitive strategies: Good strategy users coordinate metacognition and knowledge.
Prior, P. (2006). A sociocultural theory of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 54-66). The Guilford Press.
Richa, N., & Geiger, S. (2007). Reflexivity and positionality in feminist fieldwork revisited. Politics and Practice in Economic Geography, A. Tickell, E. Sheppard, J. Peck, T. Barnes (eds.), 267-278.
Ruan, Z. (2014). Metacognitive awareness of EFL student writers in a Chinese ELT context. Language Awareness, 23(1-2), 76-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.863901
Sandelowski, M. (1995). Qualitative analysis: What it is and how to begin. Research in Nursing & Health, 18(4), 371-375. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.4770180411
Sawaki, Y., Quinlan, T., & Lee, Y. W. (2013). Understanding learner strengths and weaknesses: Assessing performance on an integrated writing task. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(1), 73-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.633305
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1987). Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition. Advances in Applied Psycholinguistics, 2, 142-175.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033
Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 3-16). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2243-8_1
Selfe, C. L. (1986). Computer-Assisted Instruction in Composition: Create Your Own. National Council of Teachers of English, 1111 Kenyon Rd., Urbana, IL 61801 (Stock No. 08418, $12.00 member, $15.00 nonmember).
Serra, M. J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Effective implementation of metacognition. In Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 278-298). Routledge.
Shanahan, T. (1984). Nature of the reading–writing relation: An exploratory multivariate analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(3), 466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.3.466
Shanahan, T., & Lomax, R. G. (1986). An analysis and comparison of theoretical models of the reading–writing relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 116. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.78.2.116
Shaw, P., & Pecorari, D. (2013). Types of intertextuality in Chairman’s statements. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 12(1), 37-64.
Shi, L. (2004). Textual borrowing in second-language writing. Written Communication, 21(2), 171-200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088303262846
Shi, L. (2010). Textual appropriation and citing behaviors of university undergraduates. Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn045
Shin, S. Y., & Ewert, D. (2015). What accounts for integrated reading-to-write task scores?. Language Testing, 32(2), 259-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214560257
Smith, F. (1983). Reading like a writer. Language Arts, 60, 558-567
Spack, R. (1997). The acquisition of academic literacy in a second language: A longitudinal case study. Written Communication, 14(1), 3-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883970140010
Spivey, N. N. (1990). Transforming texts: Constructive processes in reading and writing. Written Communication, 7(2), 256-287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088390007002004
Spivey, N. N. (1996). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing and the making of meaning. In The Constructivist Metaphor. Brill.
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stanovich, K. E. (1990). Concepts in developmental theories of reading skill: Cognitive resources, automaticity, and modularity. Developmental Review, 10(1), 72-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(90)90005-O
Tarricone, P. (2011). The taxonomy of metacognition. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830529
Teng, M. F., Qin, C., & Wang, C. (2022). Validation of metacognitive academic writing strategies and the predictive effects on academic writing performance in a foreign language context. Metacognition and Learning, 17(1), 167-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09278-4
Thomas, G. P. (1999). Developing metacognition and cognitive strategies through the use of metaphor in a year 11 chemistry classroom (Doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology)
Thomas, G., Anderson, D., & Nashon, S. (2008). Development of an instrument designed to investigate elements of science students’ metacognition, self-efficacy and learning processes: The SEMLI-S. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1701-1724. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701482493
Thomas, G. P. (2003). Conceptualisation, development and validation of an instrument for investigating the metacognitive orientation of science classroom learning environments: The Metacognitive Orientation Learning Environment Scale–Science (MOLES-S). Learning Environments Research, 6(2), 175-197. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024943103341
Thomas, G. P., & McRobbie, C. J. (2001). Using a metaphor for learning to improve students` metacognition in the chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 222-259.https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2<222::AID-TEA1004>3.0.CO;2-S
Thomas, G. P. (2012). Metacognition in science education: Past, present and future considerations. In Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 131-144). Springer, Dordrecht.
Tierney, R. J., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading–writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Tseng, W. T., Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2006). A new approach to assessing strategic learning: The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 78-102. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami046
Ushioda, E. (2014). Motivation, autonomy and metacognition. Motivation and foreign language learning: From theory to practice, 31-49.
Veenman, M. V., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). Intellectual and metacognitive skills of novices while studying texts under conditions of text difficulty and time constraint. Learning and Instruction, 14(6), 621-640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.09.004
Veenman, M. V., Hout-Wolters, V., Bernadette, H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0
Vandergrift, L., Goh, C. C., Mareschal, C. J., & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2006). The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation. Language Learning, 56(3), 431-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.x
Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. C. (2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429287749
Van de Kamp, M. T., Admiraal, W., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2016). Becoming original: effects of strategy instruction. Instructional Science, 44(6), 543-566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9384-y
Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1990). What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. The Journal of Educational Research, 84(1), 30-43. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40539680
Watanabe, Y. (2001). Read-to-write tasks for the assessment of second language academic writing skills: Investigating text features and rater reactions. University of Hawai`i at Manoa.
Wenden, A. (1987). Metacognition: An expanded view on the cognitive abilities of L2 learners. Language Learning, 37(4), 573-597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1987.tb00585.x
Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning1. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515-537. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.4.515
Wenden, A. L. (2001). Metacognitive knowledge in SLA: The neglected variable. Learner contributions to language learning: New directions in research, 44-64.
Whittlesea, B. W. (1993). Illusions of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(6), 1235.
Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Sage.
Wong, M. Y. (2005). Metacognitive awareness and usage (Doctoral dissertation).
Yang, H. C., & Plakans, L. (2012). Second language writers’ strategy use and performance on an integrated reading-listening-writing task. TESOL Quarterly, 46(1), 80-103. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.6
Yin, R. K. (2013). Design and methods. Case Study Research, 3(9.2)
Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative research methods, 5(14), 359-386.
Yuan, R., & Zhang, L. J. (2020). Teacher metacognitions about identities: Case studies of four expert language teachers in China. TESOL Quarterly, 54(4), 870-899. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.561
Zhang, D., & Goh, C. C. (2006). Strategy knowledge and perceived strategy use: Singaporean students’ awareness of listening and speaking strategies. Language Awareness, 15(3), 199-119. https://doi.org/10.2167/la342.0
Zhang, L. J., (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students` metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10(4), 268-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410108667039
Zhang, L. J., & Qin, T. L. (2018). Validating a questionnaire on EFL writers’ metacognitive awareness of writing strategies in multimedia environments. In Metacognition in language learning and teaching (pp. 157-178). Routledge.
Zhang, D., & Zhang, L. J. (2019). Metacognition and self-regulated learning (SRL) in second/foreign language teaching. Second handbook of English language teaching, 883-897. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_47
Zhang, L. J., & Zhang, D. (2018). Metacognition in TESOL: Theory and practice. The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0803
Zhang, L. J., & Zhang, D. (2013). Thinking metacognitively about metacognition in second and foreign language learning, teaching, and research: Toward a dynamic metacognitive systems perspective. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 396(12), 111-121.
Zhang, L. J. (2010). A dynamic metacognitive systems account of Chinese university students` knowledge about EFL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 320-353. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.223352
Zhao, C. G., & Liao, L. (2021). Metacognitive strategy use in L2 writing assessment. System, 98, 10247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102472
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(2), 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.51		zh_TW