Metacognitive Reading Strategies, Motivation, and Reading Comprehension Performance of Saudi EFL Students

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

Reading comprehension is one of the most essential study skills in higher education. Academic and technical courses demand substantial readings, requiring students to comprehend what they read to succeed academically and professionally. In Saudi Arabia, reading and writing are among the least developed linguistic skills, as evidenced by TOEFL iBT® and IELTS test reports. This deficiency can be attributed to students' limited exposure to English reading activities and low interest and motivation to read.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Metacognitive Reading Strategies

Metacognitive reading strategies refer to the conscious awareness and control of cognitive processes during reading. Flavell's (1979) metacognition theory forms the foundation, emphasizing the reader's ability to monitor, control, and regulate their reading comprehension. The Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) identifies three main categories: Global Reading Strategies (GLOB), Problem-Solving Strategies (PROB), and Support Reading Strategies (SUP).

2.2 Reading Motivation Theories

Reading motivation encompasses the beliefs, values, and goals that drive individuals to engage in reading activities. Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) distinguishes between intrinsic motivation (reading for enjoyment) and extrinsic motivation (reading for external rewards). The Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ) measures various aspects of reading motivation, including self-efficacy, curiosity, involvement, and recognition.

2.3 Reading Comprehension Models

Reading comprehension involves constructing meaning through interaction with text. The Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986) posits that reading comprehension equals the product of decoding and linguistic comprehension: $RC = D \times LC$. More recent models, such as the Construction-Integration Model (Kintsch, 1998), emphasize the interactive nature of reading comprehension.

3. Methodology

3.1 Research Design

This study employed descriptive survey and descriptive correlational methods to investigate the relationships between metacognitive reading strategies, reading motivation, and reading comprehension performance.

3.2 Participants

The study involved 60 randomly selected Saudi college-level EFL students from an all-male government-owned industrial college in Saudi Arabia. Participants were selected using random sampling techniques to ensure representativeness.

3.3 Instruments

Three main instruments were used: the Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) to measure metacognitive awareness, the Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ) to assess reading motivation, and standardized reading comprehension tests to evaluate reading performance.

3.4 Data Analysis

Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations) and inferential statistics (t-tests, correlation analysis). The significance level was set at p < 0.05.

4. Results

4.1 Statistical Analysis

The study revealed that respondents moderately use different metacognitive reading strategies when reading academic texts. Among the three categories, Problem-Solving Strategies (PROB) were the most frequently used. Respondents demonstrated high motivation to read, with particular preference for humor/comic books.

4.2 Correlation Findings

Using t-test analysis, the study found no significant correlation between metacognitive reading strategies and reading comprehension (r = 0.18, p > 0.05). There was also no significant correlation between reading interest/motivation and reading comprehension (r = 0.12, p > 0.05). However, a positive correlation was found between reading strategies and reading motivation (r = 0.42, p < 0.05).

5. Discussion

The findings of this study contradict previous research that typically shows positive correlations between metacognitive strategies, motivation, and reading comprehension. This discrepancy may be attributed to cultural factors, educational context, or measurement instruments. The Saudi educational context, with its limited exposure to English reading activities and different cultural attitudes toward reading, may explain these unexpected results.

6. Technical Analysis

Original Analysis

This study presents intriguing findings that challenge established theories in second language reading research. The absence of correlation between metacognitive strategies and reading comprehension performance among Saudi EFL students contradicts numerous previous studies, including those by Carrell (1998) and Zhang (2001), who found significant positive relationships. This discrepancy may be explained by cultural and contextual factors specific to the Saudi educational environment. According to research from the National Reading Panel (2000), effective reading instruction typically involves explicit strategy teaching, yet this study suggests that in certain cultural contexts, traditional approaches may require significant adaptation.

The mathematical relationship between reading comprehension and its predictors can be expressed using multiple regression analysis: $RC = \beta_0 + \beta_1MS + \beta_2RM + \epsilon$, where RC represents reading comprehension, MS denotes metacognitive strategies, RM indicates reading motivation, and $\epsilon$ represents error variance. In this study, the coefficients $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$ were not statistically significant, suggesting that other unmeasured variables may be more influential in this specific context.

Comparative analysis with studies from similar contexts, such as those cited in the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report (2021), reveals that reading comprehension outcomes are heavily influenced by socioeconomic factors, educational policies, and cultural attitudes toward reading. The high motivation but low comprehension performance observed in this study aligns with findings from other Gulf countries where students exhibit positive attitudes toward English learning but struggle with academic performance, possibly due to limited authentic language exposure and reliance on rote learning methods.

Technical Diagrams

The research methodology can be visualized as a structural equation model where metacognitive strategies and reading motivation are exogenous variables predicting reading comprehension as the endogenous variable. The path coefficients from both predictors to reading comprehension were non-significant in this study, suggesting the model may require additional mediators or moderators.

Code Implementation

# Python pseudocode for correlation analysis
import pandas as pd
import scipy.stats as stats

# Load research data
data = pd.read_csv('reading_study_data.csv')

# Calculate correlations
strategy_comprehension_corr = stats.pearsonr(
    data['metacognitive_strategies'], 
    data['reading_comprehension']
)

motivation_comprehension_corr = stats.pearsonr(
    data['reading_motivation'], 
    data['reading_comprehension']
)

strategy_motivation_corr = stats.pearsonr(
    data['metacognitive_strategies'], 
    data['reading_motivation']
)

print(f"Strategy-Comprehension Correlation: {strategy_comprehension_corr}")
print(f"Motivation-Comprehension Correlation: {motivation_comprehension_corr}")
print(f"Strategy-Motivation Correlation: {strategy_motivation_corr}")

7. Future Applications

Future research should explore culturally-adapted reading strategy instruction specifically designed for Saudi and similar educational contexts. Potential applications include:

• Development of culturally-responsive reading assessment tools
• Integration of technology-enhanced reading platforms
• Longitudinal studies tracking reading development over time
• Cross-cultural comparative studies with other EFL contexts
• Investigation of additional variables such as vocabulary knowledge and reading fluency

8. References

1. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
2. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
3. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10.
4. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
5. Carrell, P. L. (1998). Can reading strategies be successfully taught? Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 1-20.
6. 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.
7. National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
8. UNESCO (2021). Global Education Monitoring Report: Non-state actors in education. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.