<>
Volume 8, Issue 4 (12-2025)
JSAL 2025, 8(4): 1-20 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Badpa H, Kord H, Dowlatabadi H R. (2025). Investigating the Impact of Metacognitive Strategies on Improving the Speaking Skill of Iranian IELTS Candidates [In English]. JSAL. 8(4), 1-20.
URL: http://jsal.ierf.ir/article-1-218-en.html
URL: http://jsal.ierf.ir/article-1-218-en.html
1- Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature and Languages, Arak University, Arak, Iran , h-badpa.03@phd.araku.ac.ir
2- English Department, Faculty of Management and Humanities, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
3- Assistant Professor, English Language and Literature Department, Faculty of Literature and Foreign Languages, Arak, Iran
2- English Department, Faculty of Management and Humanities, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
3- Assistant Professor, English Language and Literature Department, Faculty of Literature and Foreign Languages, Arak, Iran
Abstract: (920 Views)
This study explores the transformative impact of metacognitive strategy instruction on the speaking proficiency of Iranian advanced English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, particularly those preparing for the IELTS exam, by comparing it to conventional teaching approaches. Grounded in self-regulated learning theories (Flavell, 1979, pp.906-911; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2009), metacognitive strategies—encompassing planning (e.g., goal-setting and concept mapping), monitoring (e.g., self-correction via checklists), and evaluation (e.g., reflective assessments)—empower learners to regulate their cognitive processes, fostering greater autonomy and communicative competence in high-stakes contexts where speaking anxiety is prevalent, such as among Iranian test-takers influenced by cultural factors like collectivism and test-related stress (Hofstede, 2011; Hosseini, 2020, pp.29-48). Employing a quasi-experimental mixed-methods design, the research involved 100 conveniently selected Iranian IELTS candidates (50 males and 50 females, aged 18-25) from language institutes. Participants were stratified by gender and proficiency, then randomly assigned to two groups of 50 each. Initial equivalence was ensured via the Oxford Placement Test (OPT), with no significant differences (t(98)=0.42, p=0.68). The experimental group underwent an 8-session intervention integrated into a 36-session IELTS course, featuring explicit training in metacognitive strategies through mini-lessons, guided practice, and tools like graphic organizers and reflection sheets. The control group received traditional instruction emphasizing repetitive drills, model answers, and error correction. Data collection included pre- and post-intervention speaking assessments via audio-recorded conversational tasks on familiar, engaging topics (e.g., technological innovations or family roles, with one on recent social events for authenticity), scored on a 0-20 scale adapted from IELTS descriptors for fluency, accuracy, and lexical resource (inter-rater reliability: Cohen's Kappa=0.85). Supplementary measures comprised the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) for awareness levels and immediate recall interviews for qualitative insights into self-assessment processes. Results revealed statistically significant enhancements in the experimental group's speaking skills, with a mean post-test gain of 1.65 points (from 6.25 to 7.90, SD=0.75-0.85; t(49)=11.46, p<0.001, Cohen's d=2.21), far surpassing the control group's modest 0.40-point improvement (from 6.15 to 6.55, SD=0.75-0.85; t(49)=1.46, p=0.149, d=0.26). Between-group post-test differences were substantial (t(98)=9.34, p<0.001, d=1.89), with ANOVA confirming main effects across components: fluency (F(1,98)=87.19, p<0.001, η²=0.47), accuracy (F=82.45, p<0.001, η²=0.46), and lexical resource (F=65.78, p<0.01, η²=0.40). MAI results showed gains in regulatory skills for the experimental group (M increase=0.45, p<0.01, d=0.59), while qualitative themes from interviews highlighted increased planning confidence (78% of participants), real-time error correction (65%), and cultural alignment with collaborative reflection. These findings affirm the pedagogical superiority of metacognitive instruction over traditional methods in EFL contexts, addressing a research gap in Iranian IELTS preparation (Heidari Vincheh et al., 2024). Practical implications include recommendations for educators to adopt the "P-M-E Cycle" (Plan-Monitor-Evaluate) in classrooms, for curriculum developers to integrate strategy modules into materials, and for learners to build self-efficacy. Limitations, such as the intervention's brevity and potential topic sensitivity, suggest avenues for future longitudinal, multi-site studies. Ultimately, this research underscores metacognition's role in cultivating resilient, autonomous speakers, enhancing communicative outcomes in diverse cultural settings.
Keywords: Metacognitive Strategies, Speaking Skills, EFL Learners, IELTS Speaking, Self-Regulated Learning
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Language Teaching
Received: 2025/10/22 | Accepted: 2025/11/24 | Published: 2025/12/1
Received: 2025/10/22 | Accepted: 2025/11/24 | Published: 2025/12/1
References
1. Babajanzade Alehchali, A., Muhammadpour, M., & Bozorgian, H. (2025). The effects of metacognitive intervention and metacognitive intervention through dialogic interaction on L2 learners' listening comprehension and cognitive load. Language Awareness. Advance online publication.DOI: 10.1080/09658416.2025.2489937 [DOI:10.1080/09658416.2025.2489937]
2. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: a new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learn. Instr. 7, pp. 161-186. DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00015-1 [DOI:10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00015-1]
3. Dayag-Tungpalan, M. L. (2023). "Metacognitive strategies and perceived factors affecting the speaking performance of ESL learners". Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 14(2), pp. 547-556. DOI: 10.47750/jett.2023.14.02.049 [DOI:10.47750/jett.2023.14.02.049]
4. Dewi, F. A., Kahfi, E. H., & Kurniawati, N. (2017). Exploring EFL students' metacognitive strategies in speaking class: An Indonesian context. In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Applied Linguistics and the Second English Language Teaching and Technology Conference in collaboration with the First International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture, and Education (pp. 149-152). SCITEPRESS. DOI: 10.5220/0007163601490152 [DOI:10.5220/0007163601490152]
5. Do, H. M., & Phan, H. L. T. (2021). "Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies on Second Language Vietnamese Undergraduates". Arab World English Journal, 12(1), pp. 90-112. DOI: 10.24093/awej/vol12no1.7 [DOI:10.24093/awej/vol12no1.7]
6. Dooey, P., & Oliver, R. (2002). "An investigation into the predictive validity of the IELTS test". Prospect, 17, pp. 36 -54. [In English]
7. Flavell, J. H. (1979). "Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist", 34(10), pp. 906-911. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 [DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906]
8. Flavell, J. H. (1993). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. In T. O. Nelson (Ed.), Metacognition: core readings (pp. 3-8). Allyn & Baker. [In English]
9. Flavell, J. H., Miller, P. & Miller, S. (2002). Cognitive development. Prentice Hall. [In English]
10. Heidari Vincheh, M., Mirzaei, A., & Roohani, A. (2024). "A cognitive diagnostic approach to IELTS speaking test: Unveiling the subskills and test-takers' perceptions". Language Testing in Asia, 14(42). DOI: 10.1186/s40468-024-00311-2 [DOI:10.1186/s40468-024-00311-2]
11. Hofstede, G. (2011). "Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context". Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). DOI: 10.9707/2307-0919.1014 [DOI:10.9707/2307-0919.1014]
12. Hosseini, G., Izadpanah, S., & Fasih, P. (2020). "The effect of metacognitive strategy training on the listening performance of EFL learners at different proficiency levels". International Journal of Research in English Education, 5(2), pp. 29-48. DOI: 10.29252/ijree.5.2.29 [DOI:10.29252/ijree.5.2.29]
13. Hosseini, M. S. (2021). "Analyzing the Effect of Using Meta-cognitive Strategies on Iranian EFL Learners' Writing Skill". Journal of Language and Translation, 11(5), pp. 199-219. [In English]
14. Kerstjens, M., & Nery, C. (2000). "Predictive validity in the IELTS test: A study of the relationship between IELTS scores and students' subsequent academic performance". IELTS Research Reports, 3, pp. 85-108. [In English]
15. Mohammadi, M., & Mohebi, A. (2022). "The interface between metacognitive strategy training and locus of control in developing EFL learners' listening comprehension skill". Frontiers in Education, 7, Article 847564. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2022.847564 [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2022.847564]
16. Moore, T., Morton, J., & Price, S. (2005). Construct validity in the IELTS Academic Reading test: A comparison of reading requirements in IELTS test items and university study. IELTS research center, pp. 11, 1-89. [In English]
17. O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139524490]
18. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). "The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning," in Handbook of Self-Regulation, eds M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (San Diego, CA: Academic Press), pp. 452-502. [In English] [DOI:10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3]
19. Rezai, A., Namaziandost, E., & Hosseini, G. H. (2023). "Impact of online self-assessing metacognitive strategies accompanied by written languaging on cultivating Iranian IELTS candidates' listening comprehension". Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), Article 45. DOI: 10.1186/s40561-023-00265-7 [DOI:10.1186/s40561-023-00265-7]
20. Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking: From theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.
21. Robinson, F. P. (1946). Effective study. Harpers and Brothers Publishers. [In English]
22. Saif, Ali Akbar. (2013). Modern educational psychology. Teaching and learning. Tehran: Aghaz Publications. [In English]
23. Salim, N. S. M., Zulmaidi, F. A.-Z., Nasir, N. S., Rajan, A., Ismail, N. I. S., & Hashim, H. (2025). "Metacognitive strategies for English proficiency: A study on primary school learners' self-regulated learning". International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(7), pp. 1041-1057. DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90600083 [DOI:10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90600083]
24. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). "Assessing metacognitive awareness". Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), pp. 460-475. DOI: 10.1006/ceps.1994.1033 [DOI:10.1006/ceps.1994.1033]
25. Veenman, M. V. J., Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. (2024). "The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective". Learning and Instruction, 14 (1), pp. 89-109. [In English] [DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.004]
26. Wu, J. & Lee, M. (2004). The relationships between test performance and students' perceptions of learning motivation, test value, and test anxiety in the context of the English benchmark requirement for graduation in Taiwan's universities. Language Testing in Asia (2017) 7:9 DOI: 10.1186/s40468-017-0041-4 [DOI:10.1186/s40468-017-0041-4]
27. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2009). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. Routledge. [In English]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |