The use of metacognitive strategies to foster descriptive writing in english

Jaramillo Mesa, Sandra Patricia

dc.contributor.advisor	Cuesta Medina, Liliana Marcela
dc.contributor.author	Jaramillo Mesa, Sandra Patricia
dc.date.accessioned	2019-07-24T16:04:46Z
dc.date.available	2019-07-24T16:04:46Z
dc.date.issued	2019-06-19
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10818/36316
dc.description	48 páginas	es_CO
dc.description.abstract	This paper presents the results from a mixed- method study that examined the writing practices and difficulties of undergraduate students in a Colombian university. In answering the research question, the process-genre approach was adopted to lead the pedagogical intervention, concerning three metacognitive strategies (planning, monitoring, controlling, and evaluating) to support the writing of descriptive paragraphs. A first phase included the application of the metacognitive awareness inventory (MAI) research instrument, in order to diagnose the existence of learners’ metacognitive strategies. The participants were 17 A2 learners aged 18-22. A second phase included the implementation of two tasks to validate learners’ writing performance through the process-genre approach, whereby the collected data was analyzed following grounded theory procedures. The findings of this study revealed that students perform better in writing when they are aware of their learning process and undertake the use of metacognitive strategies such as planning, monitoring, controlling and evaluating to regulate their cognition, while reconceptualizing writing from a non-traditional product-based view to a dynamic coconstructed practice.	es_CO
dc.format	application/pdf	es_CO
dc.language.iso	eng	es_CO
dc.publisher	Universidad de La Sabana	es_CO
dc.rights	Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International	*
dc.rights.uri	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/	*
dc.source	Universidad de La Sabana
dc.source	Intellectum Repositorio Universidad de La Sabana
dc.subject	Estrategias de aprendizaje	es_CO
dc.subject	Metacognición	es_CO
dc.subject	Educación	es_CO
dc.subject	Inglés -- Escritura	es_CO
dc.title	The use of metacognitive strategies to foster descriptive writing in english	es_CO
dc.type	masterThesis	es_CO
dc.publisher.program	Magíster en Didáctica del Inglés para el Aprendizaje Autodirigido	es_CO
dc.publisher.department	Departamento de Lenguas y Culturas Extranjeras	es_CO
dc.type.hasVersion	publishedVersion	es_CO
dc.rights.accessRights	restrictedAccess	es_CO
dc.creator.degree	Maestría en Didáctica del Inglés para el Aprendizaje Autodirigido (Virtual)	es_CO
dcterms.references	Agibuay, R. M. (2017). Descriptive writing using the process-genre writing approach. Asia Pacific Journal of Contemporary Education and Communication Technology (APJCECT), 3(1), 272–282. Retrieved from https://apiar.org.au/?journal-paper=descriptive-writingusing-the-process-genre-approach	eng
dcterms.references	Bazerman, C. (2009). Traditions of writing research. New York, NY: Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203892329	eng
dcterms.references	Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153–160. http://doi.org/10.1093/elt/54.2.153	eng
dcterms.references	Baker, L. (2010). Metacognition. In International Encyclopedia of Education, pp. 204–210. Elsevier. http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00484-X	eng
dcterms.references	Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, pp. 65–116. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.	eng
dcterms.references	Butterworth, S. W. (2008). Influencing patient adherence to treatment guidelines. Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy, 14(6 Supp B), 21–25. http://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2008.14.S6- B.21	eng
dcterms.references	Cohen, A. D. (2000). Strategies-based instruction for learners of a second language. NASSP Bulletin, 84(612), 10–18. http://doi.org/10.1177/019263650008461203	eng
dcterms.references	Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593	eng
dcterms.references	Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.	eng
dcterms.references	Cuesta, L., & Rincón, S. (2011). Short story student-writers: Active roles in writing through the use of e-portfolio dossier. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 12(1), 99. http://doi.org/10.14483/22487085.94	eng
dcterms.references	Farahian, M. (2017). Developing and validating a metacognitive writing questionnaire for EFL learners. Issues in Educational Research, 27(4), 736–750. Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier27/farahian.html	eng
dcterms.references	Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitivedevelopmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906	eng
dcterms.references	Garner, R., & Alexander, P. A. (1989). Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 143–158. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2402_2	eng
dcterms.references	Ghufron, M. A. (2016). Process-genre approach, product approach and students’ self-esteem in teaching writing. Indonesian EFL Journal: Journal of ELT, Linguistics, and Literature, 2(1), 37–54. Retrieved from https://doaj.org/article/5e628d21f19f410ea2a2a9abfc12d35b	eng
dcterms.references	Goctu, R. (2017). Metacognitive strategies in academic writing, 2(2), 82–96.	eng
dcterms.references	Hacker, D. J., Keener, M. C., & Kircher, J. C. (2009). Writing is applied metacognition. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 154–172). New York City, NY: Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203876428	eng
dcterms.references	Händel, M., Artelt, C., & Weinert, S. (2013). Assessing metacognitive knowledge: Development and evaluation of a test instrument. Journal for Educational Research Online / Journal Für Bildungsforschung Online, 5(2), 162–188. Retrieved from http://www.journal-foreducational-research-online.com/index.php/jero/article/view/365%5Cnhttp://www.journal-for-educational-research-online.com/index.php/jero/article/download/365/172	eng
dcterms.references	Horwitz, E. K., & Oxford, R. (1991). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. The Modern Language Journal. http://doi.org/10.2307/329849	eng
dcterms.references	Hudson, C. C., & Whisler, V. R. (2008). Contextual teaching and learning for practitioners. Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 6(4), 54–58. Retrieved from https://doaj.org/article/c42daf4d41354c10aefe75c7e9c697bc	eng
dcterms.references	Huertas Bustos, A. P., Vesga Bravo, G. J., & Galindo León, M. (2014). Validación del instrumento “inventario de habilidades metacognitivas (MAI)” con estudiantes colombianos. Praxis & Saber, 5(10), 55. http://doi.org/10.19053/22160159.3022	spa
dcterms.references	Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(1), 17–29. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00124-8	eng
dcterms.references	Hyland, K. (2016). Teaching and researching writing. New York City, NY: Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315833729	eng
dcterms.references	Keen, J. (2017). Teaching the writing process. Changing English, 24(4), 372–385. http://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2017.1359493	eng
dcterms.references	Kleitman, S., & Gibson, J. (2011). Metacognitive beliefs, self-confidence and primary learning environment of sixth grade students. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(6), 728–735. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.08.003	eng
dcterms.references	Kuhn, D., & Dean, Jr., D. (2004). Metacognition: A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory Into Practice, 43(4), 268–273. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4304_4	eng
dcterms.references	Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002	eng
dcterms.references	Lv, F., & Chen, H. (2010). A study of metacognitive-strategies-based writing instruction for vocational college students. English Language Teaching, 3(3), 136–144. Retrieved from www.ccsenet.org/elt	eng
dcterms.references	O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.	eng
dcterms.references	Ozturk, N. (2017). An analysis of teachers’ self-reported competencies for teaching metacognition. Educational Studies, 43(3), 247–264. http://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1273761	eng
dcterms.references	Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15–51). Hillsdale: NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.	eng
dcterms.references	Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedure and techniques. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.	eng
dcterms.references	Peñuela, D. (2018). Using metacognitive strategies to raise awareness of stress and intonation. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 20(1), 91–104. http://doi.org/10.14483/22487085.12383	eng
dcterms.references	Peterson, A. (2003). 30 ideas for teaching writing. Retrieved October 1, 2018, from https://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/922	eng
dcterms.references	Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219–225. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3	eng
dcterms.references	Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 407. http://doi.org/10.2307/3586978	eng
dcterms.references	Redwine, T., Leggette, H. R., & Prather, B. (2017). A case study of using metacognitive reflections to enhance writing skills and strategies in an agricultural media writing course. Journal of Applied Communications, 101(1). http://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1014	eng
dcterms.references	Rusinovci, X. (2015). Teaching writing through process-genre based approach. US-China Education Review A, 5(10), 699–705. http://doi.org/10.17265/2161-623X/2015.10.006	eng
dcterms.references	Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. http://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033	eng
dcterms.references	Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307	eng
dcterms.references	Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing (pp. 11–23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524551.005	eng
dcterms.references	Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedure and techniques. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.	eng
dcterms.references	Surat, S., Rahman, S., Mahamod, Z., & Kummin, S. (2014). The use of metacognitive knowledge in essay writing among high school students. International Education Studies, 7(13), 212–218. http://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n13p212	eng
dcterms.references	Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Editorial: Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207–211. http://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302814	eng
dcterms.references	Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. http://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd	eng
dcterms.references	Trujillo Becerra, C. L., Alvarez Ayure, C. P., Zamudio Ordoñez, M. N., & Morales Bohórquez, G. (2015). Facilitating vocabulary learning through metacognitive strategy training and learning journals. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 17(2), 246. http://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2015.2.a05	eng
dcterms.references	Wang, Z., & Han, F. (2017). Metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive control of writing strategy between high- and low-performing Chinese EFL writers. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(7), 523. http://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0707.04	eng
dcterms.references	Wenden, A. L. (1991). Metacognitive strategies in L2 writing: A case for task knowledge. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (pp. 302–322). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.	eng
dcterms.references	Yanghee, K., & Jiyoung, K. (2005). Teaching Korean university writing class: Balancing the process and genre approach. Asian EFL Journal, 7(2), 1–15. Retrieved from http://asian-efljournal.com/1280/quarterly-journal/2005/06/teaching-korean-university-writing-classbalancing-the-process-and-the-genre-approach/	eng