Explicit instruction and learning- a Focus on Learners’ Metacognitive Grammar Awareness and Knowledge of English Tenses

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3620809/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Explicit instruction and learning- a Focus on Learners’ Metacognitive Grammar Awareness and Knowledge of English Tenses

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3620809/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

This study explores how undergraduate English language learners develop their metacognitive grammar awareness and knowledge and how they perceive their progress. The sample included 53 first year English language female undergraduates from a public university in Saudi Arabia. A consciousness-raising approach was adopted as well as tests, questionnaire, blackboard discussions and classroom activities were used to study developmental change. A set of three tests on their metacognitive knowledge of English grammar tenses were administrated over a period of 12 weeks. The result revealed an improvement in their grammar awareness of the targeted 12 English tenses. Also, a reflective questionnaire was administrated to elicit the participants’ attitudes towards their consciousness learning as well as the consciousness-raising approach. Their attitudes were mainly positive. Their online and classroom engagement differed giving favour to the latter. These findings highlight learners’ need of an L2 explicit grammar awareness approach that fosters their learning preference.

Metacognitive

Knowledge

Grammar awareness

and English language tenses

Metalinguistic awareness is a cognitive process that allows a person to be aware and in control of his/her language usage. This mental cognitive process encourages mental awareness as well as learner autonomy (Hofer & Jessner, 2019). Few studies have investigated second language learners’ metacognitive grammar awareness and knowledge of English tenses. It has been acknowledged that learners’ awareness and knowledge of L2 grammar is a slowly developing academic skill. A handful of research has explored raising learners’ awareness to the importance of L2 grammar through an explicit grammar approach (Al-Ahdal & Almarshedi, 2022; Moore, 2021). As argued by Svalberg (2012) explicit learner awareness can guide learners through their learning and cognitive development.

This study arose out from the concern of examining the optimal method of grammar instruction for second language learners. There have been sceptic views on explicit grammar instruction (Andrews, 2010; Graham & Perin, 2007; Mulroy, 2003). Extensive research on L2 metacognitive grammar knowledge throughout the past decade has revealed the pivotal role of explicit knowledge in academic learning (e.g., Moore, 2021). Learning through consciousness-raising activities require active metacognitive processing (e.g., Svalberg, 2016). As indicted in early studies the use of instruction in grammar courses are emerging (Blaauw-Hara, 2006; Devet, 2002) and have shown the efficacy in higher education (Inoue, 2015). Recent research trends have raised the following issues: the link between learners’ metacognition and their English tense development, their engagement in class and online as well as their perceptions.

Interest in metacognitive development has started in the early 1970’s by the work of Flavell (1979). He simply defined metacognition as any knowledge or cognitive activity that facilitates and regulates any cognitive activity. This early definition focused on the learners’ knowledge processing skills and cognitive engagement. However, metacognition is a multi-faced notion which includes an individual’s knowledge of self and others and the cognitive processes and strategic skills that include planning, presenting and assessing one’s own cognitive activity (Teng, 2022). Myhill and Jones (2015) examined prominent metalinguistic across research studies (e.g., Gombert, 1992; Jakobson, 1963) however, they adopted Myhill’s (2011, p. 250) metalinguistic definition as “ the explicit bringing into consciousness of an attention to language as an artifact, and the conscious monitoring and manipulation of language to create desired meanings grounded in socially shared understandings”. This definition involves both awareness and the usage of language similar to Kuo and Anderson’s (2008) view that metalinguistic includes both aspects. Metalinguistic awareness is implicitly tied with language usage (Ravid & Tolchinsky, 2002) however many studies assess learners’ awareness through their discourse production.

Metacognition knowledge reflects a high level of language learning. Sato (2022) argued that there are two sides of metacognition development as seen in language learners either as a trait or a state. The difference between these two states can be seen in the language learner’s awareness of learning, rate of progress, recall ability and her quality of cognitive engagement.

The present study focuses on learners’ metacognitive knowledge, as seen in the broader definition of metacognition. Also, metacognitive activity is conceptualized as learners’ declarative knowledge and their engagement during consciousness-raising tasks. Schraw (1994) described three dimensions learners adopt to facilitate their cognitive activity and internalize their metacognition knowledge. The first-dimension learners possess their personal knowledge of their strength and weaknesses of ones own cognitive activity. The second dimension includes task knowledge which is seen in learners’ ability to complete a task successfully whereas the third dimension is strategy knowledge which is the learners’ strategies to complete the tasks successfully. Brown (1987) proposed three sides of metacognition knowledge as including declarative, procedural and conditional knowledge. Declarative knowledge are factors which influence learners’ performance, procedural knowledge manifests one’s own knowledge in applying procedural skills whereas conditional knowledge is knowledge effected by the time and condition that promotes cognitive activity.

Metacognitive knowledge reflects what learners’ know, either formally or informally, explicit or implicit (Teng, 2022). There is a need to provoke this knowledge and make learners conscious of their knowledge so they can easily retrieve their metacognitive knowledge and reveal their awareness. Investigating metacognitive knowledge is reflected in learners of all ages however the scope of this research is on university students (Cotterall & Murray, 2009). Few studies explored young learners’ development of metacognitive knowledge (e.g., Annevirta, Laakkonen, Kinnunen, & Vauras, 2007; Annevirta & Vauras, 2001; Flavell, 1979; Marulis, Palincsar, Berhenke, & Whitebread, 2016; Schneider, 2008; Schneider & Sodian, 1991; Teng & Zhang, 2021). The results mainly showed that children build low levels of metacognitive knowledge during a long period of time. They also, varied individually according to task opportunities, age and early knowledge of declarative and procedural metacognition. On the other hand, older secondary children have more command on their metacognitive knowledge while learning and reflect higher metacognitive knowledge (Edossa, Neuenhaus, Artelt, Lingel, & Schneider, 2019) whereas Schneider, Lingel, Artelt, and Neuenhaus (2017) reported that their learners were more aware in lower secondary grades and that their metacognitive knowledge decreased. Watson, Newman, and Morgan (2021) study collected data from 17 lessons of approximately one hour each, with 10–11-year-old students in their final year of primary school. Through audio capture and transcription of the lessons, the researchers coded the conversations for evidence of declarative knowledge (mentioning or discussing grammar) and procedural knowledge (putting grammar into practice through oral composition of text). The study found that there was very limited evidence of students using terminology to explore writing choices.

Several studies explored undergraduates metacognitive knowledge such as Teng (2020) study investigated how EFL learners metacognition, relates to writing performance among 882 Chinese students at eight universities. The study found that the students' scores on six different aspects of metacognition were positively correlated with their writing performance, and that scores on procedural knowledge, planning, monitoring, and evaluating were particularly important for writing success. Additionally, metacognitive regulation was found to be a unique predictor of writing proficiency beyond the influence of metacognitive knowledge. Therefore, the study suggests that it is crucial to improve metacognitive regulation skills to enhance university EFL learners' writing abilities.

Thanh Son (2022) analysis of the Swedish and Vietnamese learners' declarative and procedural knowledge revealed different profiles. The Swedish learners performed better on the procedural tasks, with 21 of them (62%) using third-person singular present -s at least on two occasions with different verbs. For the Vietnamese learners, only sixteen learners (36%) scored high on the procedural task. The recordings of the learners were transcribed using the CHAT standard as used in the Child Language Data Exchange System.

Hassan, Kasan, Alawawda, and Soliman (2022) study explored the metalinguistic reflective beliefs and teachers' beliefs on grammar content knowledge of Saudi English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers. A cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess the reflective beliefs and content knowledge of the teachers using three elements: reflective thinking in the context of grammar instruction, teachers' attitudes about conceptual knowledge, and instructors' satisfaction with the textbook they were using. The results showed that Saudi EFL teachers have a positive view of their metalinguistic reflective beliefs and teachers' beliefs on grammar content knowledge, and that there is a positive relationship between the two variables. Implications of this study will strengthen the language teaching skills of teachers to strengthen the grammar curriculum of the Saudi context.

More research is needed to explore the developmental of metacognitive knowledge and to test the developmental assumptions if such issue in particular domains such as second language grammar to ideally lead to conscious language learners.

Previous research has provided some insight about second language learners metacognitive development; however, little is known about learners’ dynamics between metacognitive knowledge and their L2 grammar awareness. Hence, empirical data is needed to support the investigation between metacognitive knowledge and their grammar awareness in adult learners. The hypothesis that learners possess greater metacognitive knowledge may have a better awareness of L2 grammar has led to this investigation and the following three research questions have been outlined:

How did the learners’ metacognitive knowledge of English tenses develop?

What are learners’ perceptions of their English language tense learning?

How did the learners engage in class and online?

This study was designed to examine the development of undergraduate English language learners’ metacognitive knowledge and grammar awareness along with their perceptions. The three tests were identical across all periods shedding light on the 12 English language tenses. The participants were first year English language female undergraduates from a public university in Saudi Arabia. Their English instruction began in primary school grade 4, however, many participants reported that they started to learn basic English during their early years in kindergarten. Their English grammar instruction was explicit during their secondary school education. Participants were given a briefing about the aim of the study and attended on a voluntary basis. They signed a consent sheet agreeing to participate in the current study. The names used in the current study are pseudonymous. The study started with 60 participants and ended with those attending the study fully 53 participants, the students who did not attend the entire study were excluded from the data analysis.

The current study illustrated learners’ metacognitive language and grammar awareness through three tests pretest, post-test, and delayed post-test. Also, online and in class activities were given to the learners to promote such awareness and knowledge. The online activities are from Games to Learn English on the English tenses on the other hand the class activities are from Understanding and Using English Grammar by Azar, Koch, and Hagen (2009). These activities aimed at raising learners’ awareness to English language tenses and how to use them appropriately in oral and written form as second language learners. The activities were receptive and productive such as fill in the blank, choose and use the following tense to write on a specific topic.

The experiment also utilized blackboard discussion forum where every week the instructor and the participants would discuss an English tense for example if it was the present tense, we will give examples correct each other’s examples and discuss how can we use this tense efficiently in the second language. Moreover, online English tense games were given to the students where each tense, they would be an illustration with a sentence, and they must choose the correct answer and they would get be given immediate feedback while playing this online game they could do it unlimited times. The examples were driven from Hashemi and Murphy (2004).

The questionnaire was handed at the end of the experiment to elicit learners’ perceptions towards this explicit grammar awareness approach. The following is a presentation of the learners’ results in the tests and questionnaire.

The current study focused on English tenses; tests, questionnaires, class and online engagements with the consciousness-raising activities.

Tests

The grammar awareness test investigated learners’ knowledge of their cognitive processes specifically their ability to remember and understand the use of English language tenses. The test was 40 items, the following is an example of some of the items included in the test:

1. Our team …………… the football game tomorrow.

a. won

b. will win

c. win

d. was winning

The tests included the 12 English language tenses that were presented in the experiment such as the present, past, future progressive, past progressive, present perfect progressive and so on. The test was of receptive a receptive test prompting learners to remember and understand the usage of English tenses. The duration of the investigation took three months, the pretest was administrated at the beginning of the experiment then the post-test was administrated on week 10 and the delayed post-test was on week 12, hence 2 weeks after the experiment was over. The following table shows the participants mean and standard deviation in the pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test:

Table 1

Grammar awareness test results
Test	N	Mean	Standard Deviation
Pre-test	53	16.13	3.79
Post-test	53	32.25	6.58
Delayed post-test	53	30.75	6.79

Mauchly's test of sphericity indicated that the assumption of sphericity had been violated, χ²(2) = 6.881, p = .032, and therefore a Greenhouse-Geisser correlation was used (ε = .594). The Repeated Measures ANOVA test indicated that there is a significant difference in the three tests, F(1.19, 8.32) = 14.92, p = .004, with a mean of 16.13 for pre-test, 32.25 for post-test, 30.75 for delayed. The post-hoc paired t-test test using a Bonferroni corrected α = .017 indicated that the means of the following pairs are significantly different. Since the p-value < α, H₀ the p-value equals 0.003545, ( P(x ≤ 14.9236) = 0.9965 ). The observed effect size η² is large, 0.2. This indicates that the magnitude of the difference between the averages is large.The assumption was checked based on the Shapiro-Wilk test (α = 0.05). It is assumed that the residuals do follow the normal distribution (p-value is 0.7881), or more accurately, you can't reject the normality assumption. In general, there is a significant difference in the participants’ awareness of English grammar tenses between the pre-test, post-test and delayed post-test.

Questionnaire

The questionnaire aimed at eliciting learners’ perceptions of their engagement with English tenses. It taps on learners’ perceptions towards the intervention, activities and their cognitive and social engagement with English tense online and in-class activities and test. 47 students have done the questionnaire. The variety in these questions aim first to meet the research objectives and to collect all the necessary data that can support the discussion, results and recommendations in the research.

Table 2

Learners’ attitudes towards the grammar awareness approach
No.	Item	No. of Agreements	Percentage	Average
1.	It’s important to know English Language tenses.	39	87.17%	4.35
2.	I prefer the instructor to explain English language tenses.	40	89.73%	4.48
3.	I prefer to memorise English language tenses.	33	76.91%	3.84
4.	It is important to use English language tenses in writing and speech correctly.	41	94.86%	4.74
5.	Knowing English language tenses helps me with reading and writing.	39	87.17%	4.35
6.	Because of the activities I am aware of English language tenses.	38	84.60%	4.23
7.	I understand how to do the activities in class.	38	84.60%	4.23
8.	I believe that I learned English tenses through the activities.	39	87.17%	4.35
9.	It is easy to learn English language tenses.	31	69.22%	3.46
10.	English language tenses are easy, but it is difficult to apply the rule in the activities.	22	53.84%	2.69
11.	The activities helped me notice English tenses in other courses.	41	94.86%	4.74
12.	Including English tenses in other courses can develop my English language learning.	40	92.30%	4.61
13.	Online English tenses activities helped me learn English tenses.	40	92.30%	4.61
14.	It was difficult to do the first English tense exam.	24	51.28%	2.56
15.	It was difficult to do the second English tense exam.	19	41.02%	2.05
16.	The activities helped me do the second English tense exam better.	39	87.17%	4.35
17.	I prefer to do the English tenses activities by myself.	25	58.97%	2.94
18.	I prefer to do the English tenses activities as a group.	33	76.92%	3.84
19.	I will continue to learn English language tenses.	39	87.17%	4.35
20.	I like to participate in class.	35	82.04%	4.10
21.	I like to ask questions and discuss the activities in class.	31	69.22%	3.46
22.	I like to participate in the online forum and ask questions.	33	76.91%	3.84
23.	I prefer to listen to my peers without participating.	19	41.02%	2.05
24.	The English tenses figures helped me learn and use English tenses.	40	89.74%	4.48
Total Average		35	77.34%	3.86

The participants highly agreed on the importance of using English language tenses in writing and speech correctly (4.74), the consciousness-raising activities helped them notice English tenses in other courses (4.74), the inclusion of English tenses in other courses can develop their English language learning (4.61), the online English tenses activities helped them learn English tenses (4.61), and English tenses figures helped me learn and use English tenses (4.48). On the other hand, the highly disagreed on is English language tenses are easy, but it is difficult to apply the rule in the activities (2.69), It was difficult to do the second English tense exam (2.05), and they prefer to listen to my peers without participating (2.05).

The participants had a positive attitude towards the importance of learning English tenses and applying them with the four English skills (3.86). They also had a positive towards the activities that were in class and that the activities helped them learn English tenses better. They also started noticing English tenses in other courses due to the activities. The participants had a very positive view towards the English tense online games on blackboard. They also liked participating in the online discussion board on English tenses as well as the English tense figures. The activities also raised their awareness to English tenses and helped them do better on the post-test. They also preferred to do the activities as a group than doing them by themselves. They had a positive attitude towards participating in class as well as having the will to continue learning and using English tenses. This can indicate that the participants’ perceptions of the awareness intervention that is applied to English tenses is positive.

On the other hand, they disagreed concerning some aspects such as passively listening to their peers, and it was difficult to do the pre-test. Hence, the questionnaire elicited their views on the grammar awareness approach which mainly was positive.

Class and online engagements

The layout of the classroom gave them the opportunity to engage with other peers. They were put into groups of four or five according to their own preferences and were all mixed proficiency.

The treatment consisted activities of the first five chapters derived from Understanding and Using English Grammar by Azar et al. (2009). The five chapters helped the researcher present English verb tenses explicitly to the participants. The first chapter presented an overview of all the 12 English verb tenses then the second chapter tackled the present and past (simple and progressive) verbs. The third focused on the perfect and progressive tenses and the fourth presented the future tenses. The fifth chapter also presented a review of all the verb tenses. The consciousness-raising tasks were derived from the book. The activities engaged the learners in inductively noticing the 12 targeted English verb tenses patterns. They were also given online English tense games to engage with. Moreover, the instructor constructed some new activities, especially focusing on forming sentences using these tenses but in relation to their experiences and how they would use them in daily life. This was done in the online forum where students would use the targeted verb tense in sentences and post them online. Then the instructor and peers would comment as threads and give feedback. These activities helped the learners recognize how to use the verb tenses in contexts related to them. The following is an example of the online forum:

Instructor: Dr Maha Abdullah

“Present Simple”

Dear Students,

This week we will write examples using the present simple tense.

98097890- Samiya Nabil

she speaks English so well

Instructor: Dr Maha Abdullah

Good job Samiya but don’t forget to capitalize “She” and put a full stop.

67806789- Reem Muath

I goes to the university everyday.

She plays horseback riding.

23400234- Hana Sultan

I like your sentences Reem!

My sister tidies her room before she studies.

Do they enjoy the party?

We meet every Thursday.

Instructor: Dr Maha Abdullah

Good job Reem but “I go to the university every day” you don’t need “-es” with “I”.

67806789- Reem Muath

Do you want me to rewrite it now?

Instructor: Dr Maha Abdullah

No, it is all right but be careful next time.

The participants engaged actively in the online forum. The instructor monitored their interaction which was very productive. Each week they would write sentences and monitor or correct their peers’ sentences concerning the targeted English verb tense.

The learner’s metacognitive development is demonstrated through their cognitive activity, which facilitates their awareness of English language verb tenses. The metacognition notion can be perceived in the learner’s knowledge of themselves during one’s own cognitive activity as well as their engagement with others through various strategic skills such a planning, presenting and engaging in cognitive activity (Teng, 2022). The study’s findings indicate that the learners’ awareness of their learning process, their recall ability and cognitive engagement, have improved, similar to Sato (2022).

This study preliminary focuses on learners’ metacognitive knowledge, which is viewed within the broader definition of metacognition. Additionally, metacognitive activity is conceptualized as learners’ declarative knowledge and their involvement in consciousness-raising tasks as described by Schraw (1994) and Brown (1987). Learners have facilitated their cognitive activities and internalized their metacognition knowledge by being aware of their own cognitive activity, employing effective learning strategies to successfully complete the task. Their declarative knowledge is evident in their performance, while their procedural knowledge is evident in their anility to apply procedural skills during class consciousness-raising activities, online forum, and games.

The objective of the intervention is to stimulate learners’ awareness and make them conscious of their learning so they can easily retrieve their metacognitive knowledge and demonstrate their awareness (Teng, 2022). The scope of this research focused on undergraduate learners command on their metacognitive knowledge while learning, with a particular emphasis on higher-level engagement with metacognitive knowledge (Edossa et al., 2019; Schneider et al., 2017).

The current study aligns with several studies that explored undergraduates metacognitive knowledge such as Teng (2020) investigation of EFL learners positive metacognition correlation with their writing performance. Furthermore, Thanh Son (2022) study revealed different results according to different L1 backgrounds which was not the case in the current research.

Hassan et al. (2022) study explored learners’ metalinguistic reflective beliefs and teachers' beliefs on grammar content knowledge of Saudi English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers. The results revealed that the learners have a positive view of their metalinguistic reflective beliefs on grammar content knowledge. Similarly, the present study showed the participants’ agreement of the importance of using proper English verb tense in discourse. They enjoyed engaging in consciousness-raising activities, online forum and the activities. However, they noted that they preferred class engagement more than the online discussion forum.

The study suggests that it is crucial to improve metacognitive regulation skills to enhance university EFL learners' English tense knowledge. Further research is needed to explore the developmental factors of metacognitive knowledge and to determine the potential developmental factors in specific domains such as second language grammar to ideally foster conscious language learners.

The result of this study shows the strong relationship between the learners’ metacognitive knowledge and their engagement in the tasks. It is concluded that the participants have developed their metacognitive knowledge of English language tenses and have manifest proficiency of the 12 tenses. They also had a favourable performance in the online games and blackboard discussions. The tests showed a positive correlation between the students’ proficiency of English tenses and their metacognitive awareness as a results students developed metacognitive awareness has shown in their developed achievement.

The analysis of the learners’ engagement in the conscious-raising activities raises several limitations for future research. As, noted we did not measure the length of these engagements and it effects positively or negatively on learners’ awareness of English tenses. Also, the current study did not compare between the class and online activities, and which had the most effect on the learners. Moreover, larger student population is needed to understand pedagogies that foster more about grammar metacognition and awareness, this reasonable study size suggests that the explicit consciousness-raising approach offers teachers and students potential space to build metalinguistic awareness. As students engage in metalanguage, they support Myhill and Newman’s (2016, p. 178) conclusion that “ classroom talk can be the cultural tool which supports the construction of shared declarative metalinguistic knowledge”. It has been noted that engaging with language features can enhance learners’ explicit knowledge of the language, current work in cognitive linguistics Evans (2019) might also provide avenues of research. Also, developing language teachers’ pedagogical skills through professional training initiatives can cater for second language learners’ needs.

On the basis of the conclusion of the current study, the following are educational implications. Unquestionably a collective theoretical framework for developing grammar awareness will involve input from various disciplinary approaches and willingness to work across disciplinary lines, can enhance language instructors’ pedagogical skills. There is need to sustain learners’ language awareness and performance through motivating self-learning skills as well as online learning programs. Also, universities should focus on developing undergraduate language learners’ metacognitive awareness of language features through online language games. The Saudi Vision 2030 has been successful in attracting a significant number of English language speakers to visit and work in the country. As a result, there has been an increase in interactions with native English speakers. Therefore, it is crucial for second language users to develop proper interaction skills when communicating with them.

Ethical Approval

The current study abided by the rules and regulations of ethical research by the Deanship of Scientific Research at the University of Tabuk.

Funding

Not Applicable

Availability of data and materials

Most of the data analysed is presented in the current study. It is possible to provide the datasets upon request.

Al-Ahdal, A. A. M. H, & Almarshedi, R. M. (2022). Metalinguistic awareness and academic achievement: Finding correlations among high-achieving EFL learners. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(4).
Andrews, K. (2010). Teaching sentence-level grammar for writing: The evidence so far. In T. Locke (Ed.), Beyond the grammar wars. A resource for teachers and students on developing language knowledge in the English/Literacy classroom (pp. 91-108): Routledge.
Annevirta, T, Laakkonen, E, Kinnunen, R, & Vauras, M. (2007). Developmental dynamics of metacognitive knowledge and text comprehension skill in the first primary school years. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 21-39.
Annevirta, T, & Vauras, M. (2001). Metacognitive knowledge in primary grades: A longitudinal study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16, 257-282.
Azar, B. S, Koch, R, & Hagen, S. (2009). Understanding and using english grammar 4th edition with answer key.
Blaauw-Hara, M. (2006). Why our students need instruction in grammar and how we should go about it. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 34(2), 165-178.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, 65-116.
Cotterall, S, & Murray, G. (2009). Enhancing metacognitive knowledge: Structure, affordances and self. System, 37(1), 34-45.
Devet, B. (2002). Welcoming grammar back into the writing classroom. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 30(1), 8-17.
Dwyer, Owen. (2023). Games to Learn English. Retrieved from https://www.gamestolearnenglish.com/past-tense-game/
Edossa, A. K, Neuenhaus, N, Artelt, C, Lingel, K, & Schneider, W. (2019). Developmental relationship between declarative metacognitive knowledge and reading comprehension during secondary school. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34, 397-416.
Evans, V. (2019). Cognitive linguistics: A complete guide: Edinburgh University Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906.
Gombert, E. J. (1992). Metalinguistic development: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Graham, S, & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Hashemi, L, & Murphy, R. (2004). English Grammar in Use Supplementary Exercises with Answers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hassan, A, Kasan, R. A, Alawawda, M, & Soliman, R. A. (2022). Metalinguistic reflective beliefs of Saudi EFL teachers in the content of grammar teaching and learning: A cross-sectional survey. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 18, 530-542.
Hofer, B, & Jessner, U. (2019). Multilingualism at the primary level in South Tyrol: How does multilingual education affect young learners’ metalinguistic awareness and proficiency in L1, L2 and L3?. The Language Learning Journal, 47(1), 76-87.
Inoue, A. B. (2015). Antiracist writing assessment ecologies: Teaching and assessing writing for a socially just future: WAC Clearinghouse.
Jakobson, R. (1963). General Linguistic Essays: Editions de Minuit.
Kuo, L. J, & Anderson, R. C. (2008). Conceptual and methodological issues in comparing metalinguistic awareness across languages. In K. Koda & A. M. Zehler (Eds.), Learning to read across languages (pp. 51-79): Routledge.
Marulis, L. M, Palincsar, A. S, Berhenke, A. L, & Whitebread, D. (2016). Assessing metacognitive knowledge in 3–5 year olds: the development of a metacognitive knowledge interview (McKI). Metacognition and Learning, 11, 339-368.
Moore, M. (2021). Grammatical concepts and metalinguistic awareness in first-year college writers: A study of reading journals. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 51(3), 178-202.
Mulroy, D. (2003). The war against grammar: Boynton Cook.
Myhill, D. (2011). The ordeal of deliberate choice: Metalinguistic development in secondary writers. In V. Berninger (Ed.), Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology (pp. 247-274): Taylor & Francis.
Myhill, D, & Jones, S. (2015). Conceptualizing metalinguistic understanding in writing/ Conceptualización de la competencia metalingüística en la escritura. Cultura Y Educación, 27(4), 839-867.
Myhill, D, & Newman, R. (2016). Metatalk: Enabling metalinguistic discussion about writing. International Journal of Educational Research, 80, 177-187.
Ravid, D, & Tolchinsky, L. (2002). Developing linguistic literacy: A comprehensive model. Journal of Child Language, 29(2), 417-447.
Sato, M. (2022). Metacognition. In The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and individual differences (pp. 95-110). London: Routledge.
Schneider, W. (2008). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents: Major trends and implications for education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 2(3), 114-121.
Schneider, W, Lingel, K, Artelt, C, & Neuenhaus, N. (2017). Metacognitive knowledge in secondary school students: Assessment, structure, and developmental change. In J Leutner, J Fleischer, W Schneider, & E Loffler (Eds.), Competence assessment in education: Research, models and instruments (pp. 285-302): Springer.
Schneider, W, & Sodian, B. (1991). A longitudinal study of young children's memory behavior and performance in a sort-recall task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 51(1), 14-29.
Schraw, G. (1994). The effect of metacognitive knowledge on local and global monitoring. Contemporary educational psychology, 19(2), 143-154.
Svalberg, A. (2012). Language Awareness in language learning and teaching: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 45(3), 376-388. doi:http://hdl.handle.net/2381/27215 http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8614398
Svalberg, A. (2016). Language Awareness research: Where we are now. Language Awareness, 25, 4-16. doi:10.1080/09658416.2015.1122027
Teng, F. (2020). The role of metacognitive knowledge and regulation in mediating university EFL learners’ writing performance. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 14(5), 436-450.
Teng, M. F. (2022). Exploring awareness of metacognitive knowledge and acquisition of vocabulary knowledge in primary grades: a latent growth curve modelling approach. Language Awareness, 31(4), 470-494.
Teng, M. F, & Zhang, L. J. (2021). Development of children’s metacognitive knowledge, reading, and writing in English as a foreign language: evidence from longitudinal data using multilevel models. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 1202-1230.
Thanh Son, V. (2022). Procedural and Declarative Knowledge: The Swedish and Vietnamese learners' acquisition of knowledge in English grammar, and Pedagogical Implications. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 2(1), 238-250.
Watson, A. M, Newman, R. M, & Morgan, S. D. (2021). Metatalk and metalinguistic knowledge: The interplay of procedural and declarative knowledge in the classroom discourse of first-language grammar teaching. Language Awareness, 30(3), 257-275.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Explicit instruction and learning- a Focus on Learners’ Metacognitive Grammar Awareness and Knowledge of English Tenses

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Introduction

Literature Review

Methodology

Results

Tests

Questionnaire

Class and online engagements

Discussion

Concluding Remarks

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1