The Effect of Metacognitive Strategy Training on Students' Speech Act Production
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55578/fepr.2507.007Keywords:
metacognitive strategies, speech acts, learning strategies, learning stylesAbstract
The identification of learning styles and the implementation of successful learning strategies have a significant impact on English teaching and learning. This study investigates the extent to which metacognitive strategy training assists EFL learners to produce speech act of request, apology, refusal and complain. To this end, two intermediate-level classes were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. Experimental group received metacognitive training and control group received conventional way of teaching speech acts. The treatment lasted for 11 sessions. Each session involved the metacognitive strategy instruction followed by pragmatic problem-solving tasks. To examine the data, the Shapiro-Wilk test and multivariate analysis of variance were conducted using SPSS software. The findings indicated that metacognitive strategy training led to notable improvements in various aspects of speech act production, such as making requests, apologies, refusals, and complain in experimental group. Moreover, Metacognition is essential for enhancing speaking abilities as it involves individuals being conscious of their own thinking processes to enhance their learning.
References
1.Taguchi, N. (2019). Second language acquisition and pragmatics. Routledge.
2.Ren, W., & Li, S. (2022). The effectiveness of instructional approaches to L2 pragmatics: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 72(1), 5–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12468
3.Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1
4.Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000018
5.Taguchi, N. (2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000263
6.Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13–32). Cambridge University Press.
7.Tajeddin, Z., & Tayebipour, F. (2012). The effect of dynamic assessment on EFL learners’ pragmatic comprehension. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 4(1), 73–106.
8.Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Harvard University Press.
9.Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
10.Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006837
11.Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press.
12.Ridwan, H., Sutresna, I., & Haryeti, P. (2019). Teaching styles of the teachers and learning styles of the students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1318(1), 012028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1318/1/012028
13.Constantino, J. A., Sison, M. H., & De Guzman, P. S. (2020). Metacognitive awareness and general average grade of 2nd year BEED and BSE students of NEUST-SIC. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 5(3), 358–365.
14.Jaleel, S. (2016). A study on the metacognitive awareness of secondary school students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(1), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040121
15.Pahayahay, G., & Cisneros-Pahayahay, M. R. (2017). Assessment of students’ metacognitive awareness level in college algebra. Advanced Science Letters, 23(2), 1130–1133. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.7534
16.Sawhney, N., & Bansal, S. (2015). Metacognitive awareness of undergraduate students in relation to their academic achievement. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 3(1), 107–114.
17.Hindun, I., Nurwidodo, N., & Wicaksono, A. G. C. (2020). Metacognitive awareness components of high-academic ability students in biology hybrid learning: Profile and correlation. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia, 6(1), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v6i1.10638
18.Zulkiply, N. (2009). Metacognition and its relationship with students' academic performance. The International Journal of Learning, 15(11), 97–106.
19.Akaydin, B. B., Yorulmaz, A., & Cokcaliskan, H. (2020). Investigation of primary school students' metacognitive awareness and decision-making skill. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(4), 158–171. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.10
20.Kallio, H., Virta, K., & Kallio, M. (2018). Modelling the components of metacognitive awareness. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 7(2), 94–122. https://doi.org/10.17583/ijep.2018.2789
21.Omprakash, A., Kumar, A. P., Kuppusamy, M., Sathiyasekaran, B. W. C., Ravinder, T., & Ramaswamy, P. (2021). Validation of Metacognitive Awareness Inventory from a private medical university in India. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 10(1), 123. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_634_20
22.Pradhan, S., & Das, P. (2021). Influence of metacognition on academic achievement and learning style of undergraduate students in Tezpur University. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(1), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.1.381
23.Sonowal, M., & Alita, M. (2017). Metacognitive awareness and academic achievement of higher secondary level science stream students of Dibrugarh District, Assam. International Education & Research Journal, 3(6), 76–79.
24.Al-Gahtani, S., & Roever, C. (2018). Proficiency and preference organization in second language refusals. Journal of Pragmatics, 129, 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.01.010
25.Bella, S. (2012). Pragmatic development in a foreign language: A study of Greek FL requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(13), 1917–1947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.08.006
26.Derakhshan, A. (2019). The relationship between Iranian EFL learners’ proficiency level and their knowledge of idiosyncratic and formulaic implicatures. Language Related Research, 10(5), 1–27.
27.Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2004). Interlanguage refusals: Linguistic politeness and length of residence in the target community. Language Learning, 54(4), 587–653. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00281.x
28.Galaczi, E. D. (2014). Interactional competence across proficiency levels: How do learners manage interaction in paired speaking tests? Applied Linguistics, 35(5), 553–574. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu017
29.Roever, C. (2009). Teaching and testing pragmatics. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 560–577). Wiley-Blackwell.
30.Rose, K. R. (2000). An exploratory cross-sectional study of interlanguage pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(1), 27–67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100001032
31.Rose, K. R. (2009). Interlanguage pragmatic development in Hong Kong, phase 2. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(11), 2345–2364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.03.002
32.Taguchi, N. (2005). Comprehending implied meaning in English as a foreign language. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 543–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2005.00329.x
33.Taguchi, N. (2007). Development of speed and accuracy in pragmatic comprehension in English as a foreign language. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 313–338. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00061.x
34.Takimoto, M. (2009). Exploring the effects of input-based treatment and test on the development of learners’ pragmatic proficiency. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.006
35.Arabmofrad, A., Derakhshan, A., & Atefinejad, M. (2019). An interplay between Iranian EFL learners’ specific and general interlanguage pragmatic motivation and their meta-pragmatic awareness. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(3), 77–94.
36.Tajeddin, Z., & Malmir, A. (2014). Knowledge of L2 speech acts: Impact of gender and language learning experience. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 1(2), 1–21.
37.Takahashi, S. (2005). Pragmalinguistic awareness: Is it related to motivation and proficiency? Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 90–120. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/26.1.90
38.Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 215–228). Multilingual Matters.
39.Safa, M. A. (2013). Emotional intelligence and SLA: The case of interlanguage pragmatic competence. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 1–24.
40.Derakhshan, A., Eslami, Z., & Ghandhari, N. (2021). Investigating the interplay of emotional intelligence and interlanguage pragmatic competence in Iranian lower-intermediate EFL learners. Issues in Language Teaching, 10(1), 37–66.
41.Sarani, A., & Malmir, A. (2020). Multiple intelligences as predictors of foreign language pragmatic knowledge: The case of five frequent English speech acts. Teaching English Language, 14(1), 183–211.
42.Diskin, C. (2017). The use of the discourse-pragmatic marker ‘like’ by native and non-native speakers of English in Ireland. Journal of Pragmatics, 120, 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.08.016
43.Malmir, A., & Derakhshan, A. (2020). Identity processing styles as predictors of L2 pragmatic knowledge and performance: A case of common English speech acts. Journal of Language Horizons, 4(2), 187–209.
44.Tajeddin, Z., & Malmir, A. (2014). Knowledge of L2 speech acts: Impact of gender and language learning experience. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 1(2), 1–21.
45.Kuriscak, L. M. (2006). Pragmatic variation in L2 Spanish: Learner and situational effects [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University]. ProQuest.
46.Taguchi, N. (2014). Personality and development of second language pragmatic competence. Asian EFL Journal, 16(3), 203–221.
47.Taguchi, N. (2019). Second language acquisition and pragmatics: An overview. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp. 1–14). Routledge.
48.Verhoeven, L., & Vermeer, A. (2002). Communicative competence and personality dimensions in first and second language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23(3), 361–374. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271640200305X
49.Reinders, H., & Wattana, S. (2012). Talk to me! Games and students’ willingness to communicate. In H. Reinders (Ed.), Digital games in language learning and teaching (pp. 156–187). Palgrave Macmillan.
50.Nordin, S., & Yunus, K. (2020). Exploring metacognitive awareness among teachers. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 9(2), 462–472.
51.O’Hara, S., Pritchard, R., & Pitta, D. (2019). Teaching with and for metacognition in disciplinary discussions. Metacognition in Learning, 1(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86665
52.Milenković, B. L. (2020). Student metacognitive awareness in L2 writing: Competence vs. performance. Lipar: Časopis za književnost, jezik, umetnost i kulturu, 21(72), 119–138.
53.Takallou, F. (2011). The effect of metacognitive strategy instruction on EFL learners’ reading comprehension performance and metacognitive awareness. Asian EFL Journal, 13(1), 272–300.
54.Tamin, İ. B., & Büyükahıska, D. (2020). Reading strategy instruction on metacognitive awareness: The case of Turkish high school students. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 20(2), 82–97.
55.Thawarom, T., Wilang, J. D., & Singhasiri, W. (2022). Metacognitive knowledge in performing a speaking task: A report from high and low proficient Thai university students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 13(3), 609–619. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1303.15
56.Sulistyowati, T., Mujiyanto, J., Rukmini, D., & Hartono, R. (2022). Developing and validating the metacognitive awareness speaking questionnaire. In 67th TEFLIN International Virtual Conference & the 9th ICOELT 2021 (pp. 210–217). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220201.036
57.Bessy, M., & Knouse, S. M. (2020). Metacognition, metalinguistic awareness, and relevance in language learning: A report on an intervention module project. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14(2), 9. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2020.140209
58.Miller, G. (2017). Metacognitive awareness and reading strategy use: Investigating the intermediate level ESL students’ awareness of metacognitive reading strategies [Master’s thesis, University of Wisconsin-River Falls].
59.Farahian, M., & Avarzamani, F. (2018). The impact of portfolio on EFL learners’ metacognition and writing performance. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1450918. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1450918
60.Bøhn, H., & Myklevold, G. A. (2018). Exploring communication strategy use and metacognitive awareness in the EFL classroom. In Å. Haukås, C. Bjørke, & M. Dypedahl (Eds.), Metacognition in language learning and teaching (pp. 179–203). Routledge.
61.Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words (2nd ed.). Harvard University Press.
62.Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
63.Teng, F. (2022). Metacognition in English language teaching and learning. Routledge.
64.Jernigan, J. E. (2007). Instruction and developing second language pragmatic competence: An investigation into the efficacy of output [Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University].
65.Bozorgian, H., & Alamdari, E. F. (2021). Enhancing L2 speaking through metacognitive instruction: A classroom-based study. The Language Learning Journal, 49(3), 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2018.1503139
66.Chamot, A. U. (2019). Learning strategy instruction in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 23(4), 416–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819832605
67.Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle.
68.Raoofi, S., Chan, S. H., Mukundan, J., & Rashid, S. M. (2014). Metacognition and second/foreign language learning. English Language Teaching, 7(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n1p36
69.Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
70.Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking: From theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Masoud Kiani, Ali Roohani (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open access article under the CC BY 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).