Examination of Reading Strategies Metacognitive Awareness Levels of French Foreign Language Students in Terms of Various Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The act of reading is a complex process in which learners rush their cognitive and metacognitive skills to fonction. The effective use of metacognitive skills is regarded as an important feature becoming prominent in successful reading. In order to exercise reading strategies effectively, students are required to have developed metacognitive awareness. In this study, the level of metacognitive awareness of reading strategies and whether metacognitive awareness varies according to variables such as gender and reading course success have been examined in the 1st grade students studying at Anadolu University Faculty of Education Program of French Language Teaching Program. 32 students voluntarily participated in the study, 19 of whom were Females and 13 of whom were Males. The data of the study have been collected with the Turkish version of the 30-item 5-point Likert-type Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) developed by Mokhtari & Reichard (2002) and adapted into Turkish by Öztürk (2012). According to the findings, students' reading strategies were revealed to have high levels of metacognitive awareness. However, it has been further observed that the level of metacognitive awareness of students' reading course success grades and reading strategies did not make a significant difference in terms of gender. Similarly, it has been observed that there was no significant difference between the students' reading strategies and metacognitive awareness levels and their success grades in the reading course.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".