CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGENO

1
INTRODUCTION 1

2 REVIEW OF RELATED 26
LITERATURE
3 METHODOLOGY 44

4 ANALYSIS AND 58
INTERPRETATIONS OF DATA

5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND 83

CONCLUSIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
 CHAPTER – I
1.1 INTRODUCTION

“Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he

learned in School”.

-Albert Einstein
Education is a central part of any society. It is a thousand times better to have
common sense without education than to have education without common
sense. For Alvin Toffler, ―The illiterate of the 21 st century will not be the ones
who do not know how to read and write but rather than ones that will not be
able to learn, unlearn and relearn. For the advancement in education, it would be
essential to develop ―how to think‖ process, the consciousness and regulation
of learning strategies called metacognition.

Metacognition enables students to benefit from instruction, influences the

use and maintenance of cognitive process. Students who identify appropriate
learning strategies in the right context are using metacognition. Metacognition
is an instructional approach which emphasizes the development of thinking
skills and process as a means to enhance learning. This objective is to enable all
students to become more strategic, self-reliant, flexible and productive in their
learning endeavors. It is based on the assumption that there are identifiable
cognitive strategies, previously believed to be utilized by only the best and the
brightest students which can be taught to most students. Use of these strategies
has been associated with successful learning, and to find what the question
means and how it may be dealt with.

1.2 MEANING OF METACOGNITION

Metacognition is defined most simply as ―thinking about thinking.‖
Metacognition consists of two components: knowledge and regulation.
Metacognitive knowledge includes knowledge about oneself as a learner and the
factors that might impact performance, knowledge about strategies, and
knowledge about when and why to use strategies. Metacognitive regulation is
the monitoring of one‘s cognition and includes planning activities, awareness of
comprehension and task performance, and evaluation of the efficacy of
monitoring processes and strategies. Recent research suggests that young
children are capable of rudimentary forms of metacognitive thought, particularly
after the age of 3. Although individual developmental models vary, most
postulate massive improvements in metacognition during the first 6 years of life.
Metacognition also improves with appropriate instruction, with empirical
evidence supporting the notion that students can be taught to reflect on their
own thinking. Assessment of metacognition is challenging for a number of
reasons:

1. Metacognition is a complex construct;

2. It is not directly observable;
3. It may be confounded with both verbal ability and working memory
4. Capacity; and
5. Existing measures tend to be narrow in focus and decontextualized
from in - school learning.

1.3 DEFINITIONS OF METACOGNITION

John Flavell originally coined the term metacognition in the late 1970s to
mean ―cognition about cognitive phenomena, or more simply ―thinking
about thinking‖ (Flavell, 1979, p. 906). Subsequent development and use of
the term have remained relatively faithful to this original meaning. (For
example)- Researchers working in the field of cognitive psychology have
offered the following definitions:

Cross & Paris ―The knowledge and control children have over their
own thinking and learning activities‖
1. Hennessey ― Awareness of one‘s own thinking, awareness of the content
of one‘s conceptions, an active monitoring of one‘s cognitive processes, an
attempt to regulate one‘s cognitive processes in relationship to further
learning, and an application of a set of heuristics as an effective device for
helping people organize their methods of attack on problems in general

2. Kuhn & Dean ―Awareness and management of one‘s own thought‖

3. Martinez ―The monitoring and control of thought‖
Schraw and Dennision (1994) defined regulation of cognitive as
comprising of the following five aspects namely planning, information
management stragies, comprehension, monitoring ,debugging strategies and
evaluation.

Dunslosky and Thide (1998) ― Metacognition refers to higher – order

mental processes involved in learning such as making plans for learning, using
appropriate skills and strategies to solve problem, making estimates of
performance and calibrating the extent of learning‖.

Ormord, (2006), A recent definition describes metacognition as ―one‘s

knowledge and beliefs about one‘s own cognitive processes and one‘s resulting
attempts to regulate those cognitive processes to maximize learning and
memory.

1.4 LITERATURE REVIEW FOR METACOGNITION

Educational psychologists have long promoted the importance of

metacognition for regulating and supporting student learning. More recently, the
Partnership for 21st Century Skills has identified self-directed learning as one of
the life and career skills necessary to prepare students for post-secondary
education and the workforce. However, educators may not be familiar with
methods for teaching and assessing metacognition, particularly among
elementary-aged children. The purpose of this literature review is fourfold:
 • To explore the ways in which metacognition has been defined by
researchers;

• To investigate how metacognition develops in young children;

• To learn how teachers can encourage development of metacognitive skills
in their students; and

• To review best practices in assessing metacognition.

1.5 METACOGNITION AND THREE TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE

To increase their metacognitive abilities, students need to possess and be
aware of three kinds of content knowledge: declarative, procedural, and
conditional.

1. Declarative knowledge is the factual information that one knows; it can

be declared—spoken or written. An example is knowing the formula for
calculating momentum in a physics class (momentum = mass times
velocity).

2. Procedural knowledge is knowledge of how to do something, of how to

perform the steps in a process; for example, knowing the mass of an
object and its rate of speed and how to do the calculation.

3. Conditional knowledge is knowledge about when to use a procedure,

skill, or strategy and when not to use it; why a procedure works and
under what conditions; and why one procedure is better than another. For
example, students need to recognize that an exam word problem requires
the calculation of momentum as part of its solution.This notion of three
kinds of knowledge applies to learning strategies as well as course
content. When they study, students need the declarative knowledge that

a) All reading assignments are not alike; for example, that a

history textbook chapter with factual information differs from a
primary historical document, which is different from an article
 interpreting or analyzing that document. They need to know
that stories and novels differ from arguments. Furthermore they
need to know that there are different kinds of note taking
strategies useful for annotating these different types of texts.
b) Students need to know how to actually write different kinds of
notes (procedural knowledge), and

c) They need to know when to apply these kinds of notes when

they study (conditional knowledge). Knowledge of study
strategies is among the kinds of metacognitive knowledge, and
it too requires awareness of all three kinds of knowledge.

1.6 ELEMENTS OF METACOGNITION:

There are four elements of metacognition:
i) Meta memory: Meta memory refers to learner awareness of which
strategies are used, and should be used, for certain tasks. It is used for
storing the information about a cognitive task ii) Meta comprehension:
It is used for detecting and rectifying the errors. This helps to improve the
performance.

iii) Self-regulation: Self-regulation refers to metacognitive adjustments

agents make concerning errors.

iv)Schema Training: Schema training is a meaningful learning for

generating own cognitive structures or frameworks.

1.7 METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS OF READING STRATEGIES

The students ‘metacognitive awareness of reading strategies was assessed
through this instrument, which was designed for measuring adolescent and adult
students‘ awareness and use of reading strategies while reading academic or
school-related materials. The MARSI questionnaire measures three broad
categories of reading strategies including:
i) GLOBAL READING STRATEGIES
GLOB are those intentional, carefully planned techniques by which
learners monitor or manage their reading, such as having a purpose in mind,
previewing the text as to its length and organization, or using typographical aids
and tables and figures(13 items) .

ii) PROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGIES

PROB are the actions and procedures that readers use while working
directly with the text. These are localized, focused techniques used when
problems develop in understanding textual information: example include
adjusting one‘s speed of reading when the material becomes difficult or easy,
guessing the meaning of unknown words, and rereading the text to improve
comprehension (8items).

iii) SUPPORT READING STRATEGIES

SUP are basic support mechanism intended to aid the readers in
comprehending the text such as using dictionary, taking notes, underlining or
high lighting textual information(9 items).

Recent research indicates that metacognitive aware learners are more

strategic and perform better than unaware learners, allowing individuals to plan,
sequence and monitor their learning in a way that directly improves
performance. Metacognition is separate from other cognitive constraints on
learning such as aptitude and domain knowledge. There is strong support for the
two – component model of metacognition includes knowledge and regulation of
cognition.

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Metacognition refers to higher order thinking that involves active control
over the thinking processes involves in learning Paris and winograd (1990)
maintained that metacognition can be promoted academic learning and
motivation. They also argued that such ―consciousness–raising‖ has twin
benefits, ―it transfers responsibility for monitoring learning from teachers to
students themselves and promotes positive self-perception, affect and
motivation among students. It provides personal insight into one‘s own thinking

And fosters independent learning‖. Metacognition has been linked with

intellectual and it has been shown that those with metacognitive abilities tend to
be more successful thinkers.
Researchers have shown that student‘s awareness of their own reading
comprehension processes can be enhanced through systematic, direct instruction

(Paris & Wino grad 1990). However they cautioned that ―Metacognition
should not be regarded as a final objective for learning or instruction‖. Instead it
should be regarded as an opportunity to ―Provide students with knowledge and
confidence that enables them to manage their own learning and empowers them
to be inquisitive and zealous in their pursuits‖. Metacognitive strategies are used
to ensure that the goal has been met.

Strategy instruction can help all students’ especially struggling ones,

become more active readers and thinkers. Paris and Winograd (1990) make
several excellent suggestions for reading strategy instruction which can be used
for all readers and particularly struggling ones.

• Describe what the strategy is,

• Explain why the strategy should be learned and used,
• Provide the examples of the circumstances under which the strategy
should be used.

Teachers can play a key role in increasing student’s awareness of such

strategies and in helping them become ―Constructively responsive‖ readers
(Pressley is Affler bach, 1995) According to chiborowski (1999), the success
of strategy instruction depends to a large degree on three important criteria
including

• The commitment teachers make to arm themselves with a set of strategies

that have shown promise with all readers, particularly struggling ones.

• How well instructors can model their own strategic thinking while
reading.
• How well they convince their students that such strategies are useful in
improving reading comprehension.
It is an important for metacognitive reading strategies instruction to be
integrated within overall reading curriculum to be integrated within overall
reading curriculum so as to enhance student‘s metacognition about reading.

A few studies have attempted to measure metacognition in a way that is

more connected to in-school learning. For example, Hennessey (1999) studied
metacognition in the context of school science. Students working in
collaborative groups were taught to represent their science conceptions
graphically, and were expected to be able to perform the following skills:

• State their own beliefs about the topic

• Consider the reasoning used to support their beliefs
• Look for consistency among their views
• Explore the implications of their views over a wide range of activities
while looking for commonalities

• Explore abstract concepts, propositions, or theories by constructing

physical representations of their views

• Distinguish between plausible, intelligible, and fruitful (grades 4-6) or

distinguish between understanding an idea and believing it to be true
(grades 1-3)

• Explicitly talk about the status of their conceptions (grades 4-6)

 • Explicitly refer to their own thinking or learning

1.9 VARIOUS LEVELS OF METACOGNITION

Hennessey developed six categories to characterize the various levels of

metacognition evident in students ‘discourse as they constructed or revised
representations of their science conceptions. Hennessey used protocol analysis
to code students ‘metacognitive behaviors according to the following scheme:

• Conceptions – any metacognitive statements in which the student

expresses his or her conceptions
• Reasoning – any statements where the student refers to reasoning to
explain his/her conceptions.

• implications – any statements in which the student is considering

implications or limitations of his/her conceptions

• thinking process – any statements in which the student is considering

his/her thinking/learning process

• status – any statement in which the student is commenting on the status of

his/her conceptions (i.e., evaluating intelligibility, plausibility,
fruitfulness of the concept)

• conceptual ecology – statements in which the student refers to or

specifically uses any components of his/her conceptual ecology

The cognitive and metacognitive elements of thinking are clearly

identified in information processing models of the mind (Sternberg
1985a). It has been the most widely used theoretical model for analyzing
intelligent performance.
 a. LEVELS OF METACOGNITIVE PROCESS
i) Metacognitive skills
The higher-level processes used for decision making, planning, monitoring,
evaluating etc.

ii) Cognitive skills

Performance components or non-executive skills, which carry out the orders
of the Meta components, providing the means such as comparing, classifying or
combining elements to achieve an end, such as to solve a problem

1) acquisition components, involved in learning new information

2) retention components , involved in storing and retrieving information
3) transfer components,, involved in carrying information from one
context to another Transfer components

Piaget called thinking about thinking 'reflective abstraction', and said that
this develops in children through their growing awareness of different
viewpoints and the experience of self-conflict when their understanding is
challenged. The years from 4 to 9 see significant developments in children in
their growing awareness of themselves as thinkers and learners. An illustration
of this is provided by Istomina (1982) in studying the ways children of different
ages set about a shopping task using a class shop. The 4 year olds ran
impulsively back and forth ' buying' things on their oral list, the 5 and 6 year
olds tried to memorize what they had been told by asking for it to be repeated,
the 7 year olds tried to make some logical connections between items on their
lists.

Cognitive development in individual children varies widely. Poor learners

show marked delays in metacognitive development (Campione 1987, Watson
1996). They have the metacognitive awareness of much younger children, they
tend to over-estimate the capacity of their memory, and they fail to try different
approaches, fail to see that similar problems can be solved by similar means
(Sternberg 1985). Pupils with learning difficulties fail not only because they
have less knowledge about tasks, but also because they fail to utilize the
knowledge and skills they have, they tend not to plan, have no strategy in
attempting tasks and do not monitor their progress. What these studies point to
is that these pupils need is not only the most explicit teaching but also
metacognitive help to improve their self-regulation and monitoring of learning.

If there is one characteristic of very able or gifted children it is that they

have more metacognitive awareness than less able peers (Sternberg 1983).
They have a clearer grasp of what they know and what they do not know, they
know what they can do and what they cannot do and they know what will help
them gain the knowledge or understanding they need. One researcher found that
very able children could 'describe in detail how they managed their mental
learning resources and what they did to improve their learning strategies. (They)
... also knew about the importance of involving the whole self - intellect,
emotion, and body - in their learning' (Freeman 1991). Metacognitive skill in
cable pupils does not necessarily show itself in evidence of 'quick thinking', but
in their ability to use quick or slow thinking when the occasion demands.
Creativity is not related to quickness of thinking. Indeed evidence suggests that
children with high IQs tend to be slower not faster than those with lower IQs in
creative problem solving, but show more insight and success (Davison, Deuser
& Sternberg 1996). Children vary in their ability to solve problems and to learn
from experience. These individual differences are related to differences of
intelligence, differences in experience (including the experience of being taught)
and to differences in the use of metacognitive processes.

1.11 IMPORTANCE OF METACOGNITIVE PROCESS IN PROBLEM

SOLVING

The importance of Metacognitive process in problem solving are

 • Recognizing the problem, identifying and defining the elements of a
given situation

• Representing the problem, making a mental map of the problem,

comparing it with others

• Planning how to proceed, deciding steps, resources and setting targets 

evaluating progress and solutions, knowing about what you know

Many problems can be solved by cognitive methods alone, for example

number problems or editing a text for correct punctuation, which require the
application of set rules. Many of the steps however that child make in solving a
problem are not simply about applying rules. Problem solvers need to direct and
guide their problem solving, know how to define the problem and select
appropriate strategy or rule. Also many problems in learning and in life are ill
structured, complex and made 'messy' by containing many kinds of variables.

Many problems have no simple solution. What do you do when you don't
know what to do? What is needed is not only the application of knowledge but
also the application of metacognitive skills, and evidence shows that these
develop with age and through practice (Metcalfe & Shimamura

1996).Metacognition helps children make the most of their mental resources.

We might use the metaphor of the machine and the workshop manual. Our
mental machines are very similar, what makes variation is the way that the
operating instructions differ from person to person. Some of us have clearer
mental representations of the way our minds work on problems than others,
some have more effective metacognitive mechanisms of operation and control.
One way to explore this is in children (and in adults) is to encourage self-
reflection. But how would you represent the workings of your own mind?
Research into ways children represent, using drawing and metaphor, the
workings of their minds show that their ability develops through the process of
maturation but that this process can be accelerated through the mediated
experience of self-reflection (Fisher 1990, 1995).

Metacognitive awareness includes knowledge of ourselves (how we

usually do or do not perform in such a situation), and knowledge about the
strategies we use to tackle tasks (how we do things). We might sum this up by
saying that the metacognitive includes cognitive elements, but cognitive
activity does not necessarily include the metacognitive. Another way of
representing this is on a continuum of awareness. Below is a guide to levels of
awareness in thinking that are increasingly metacognitive.

1.12 LEVELS OF AWARENESS

There are four types of Awareness on Metacognition
i)Tacit use: children make decisions without really thinking about them
iii) Aware use: children become consciously aware of a strategy or
decision- making process

iii) Strategic use: children organize their thinking by selecting strategies

for decision-making

iv)Reflective use: children reflect on thinking, before, during and after

The process, pondering on progress and how to improve

adapted from Swartz and Perkins (1989)

If metacognition is an essential ingredient in intelligent behavior, the

challenge for teachers is in finding ways to aid and accelerate the child's
naturally developing awareness of self.

1.13 ASSESMENT OF METACOGNITION

Metacognitive assessment – engaging in a genuine interest in understanding
students thinking – offers a novel way, through dialogue, of getting inside of
student. The activities of strategy selection and application include those
concerned with an ongoing attempt to plan, check, monitor, select, revise,
evaluate etc. Metacognition is stable in that learner initial decision derives from
the pertinent fact about their cognition through years of learning experience. It
is also situated in the sense that it depends on learner‘s familiarity with the task,
motivation, emotion and so forth. To enhance learning to the fullest and students
acquire integrate learning skills, learners to be aware of themselves as vibrant
self-regulatory organisms who can consistently and deliberately achieve specific
goals (Kluwe, 1982).

A Metacognitive environment encourages awareness of thinking; this climate

should exist right from kinder garden to professional training, at school level,
Children are expected to process and learn from information presented and
constructed in context reduced texts. For such task oriented, they are to acquire
metacognitive strategies for processing.

1.14 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Statement of the problem is ―A STUDY OF THE METACONGNITIVE
AWARNESS OF SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS in NILGIRI District.

1.15 NEED FOR THE STUDY

The term metacognition refers to a person‘s cognition about cognition or a
person‘s knowledge of cognitive process which states such as memory,
attention, knowledge, conjecture, and illusion. Metacognition is comprised of
two major components namely metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive
regulation (Schraw and Moshman, 1995). Metacognitive knowledge refers to
knowledge of cognition such as knowledge of skills and that work best for the
learner and how and when to use such skills and strategies. Metacognitive
regulations refer to activities that control one‘s thinking and learning such as
planning, monitoring comprehension and evaluation.

Metacognition is an individual‘s knowledge of their own cognitive

process and their ability to control the processes by organizing, monitoring and
modifying them as a function of learning. It refers to the ability to reflect upon
the task demand and independently select and employ the appropriate reading,
writing math or learning strategy. Student‘s metacognition is a term used to
describe a student‘s ability to analyze his or her own learning and progress. It
usually involves paying attention to what you are thinking, reading and writing
or learning.

Metacognition in the broad sense of the term refers to the cognitive control
and monitoring of first order cognitive process, including perception,
motivation, action, emotion, memory, reasoning and arousal, thus metacognitive
cannot be confused with self–directed mind reading ability. A main function of
metacognition is to detect and correct ongoing errors and failures at the
cognitive level. Another one is to allocate cognitive resources according to tasks
demands to prevent future errors and failures. Metacognition is the foundation
upon which students become independent writers. It also underlies student‘s
ability to generalize math problem solving strategies.

Metacognitive is an important to cognitive theory. It consists of two basic

processes occurring simultaneously: monitoring your process as you learn, and
making changes and adapting your strategies behaviors if you perceive you are
not doing so well (Winn, W. & Snyder.D., 1998). It‘s about self-reflection,
self-responsibility and initiative, as well as goal setting and time management.
Metacognitive skills include taking conscious control of learning, planning and
selecting strategies, monitoring the progress of learning, correcting errors,
analyzing the effectiveness of learning strategies and changing learning
behaviors and strategies whenever necessary.

The study of metacognition has provided educational psychologists about

the cognitive processes involved in learning and what differentiates successful
students from their less successful peers. It also holds several implications for
instructional interventions, such as teaching students how to be more aware of
their learning processes and products as well as how to regulate those processes
for more effective learning.

1.16 SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

This study may help the investigator understand the actual mental health,
thinking process of every people. Strategy instruction can help all students
‘especially struggling ones; become more active readers and thinkers. As
Teachers strive to create the conditions under which their students can learn to
become thoughtful strategic readers, they will need to help their students
develop the ability to read academic materials efficiently and there by enhance
their overall academic achievement in school and college.

1.17 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

Objectives of the study are as follow
1) To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level among
the students of secondary schools.

2) To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level among

the higher secondary school students with respect to the demographic
variables such as Gender, Standard, Group, Type of school, Parent‘s
Education, Parent‘s occupation and parent‘s annual income.
3) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on
Metacognition level between male and female students of secondary
schools.

4) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between VIII standard and X standard students of
secondary schools.

5) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between science, Arts and vocational group Students
of Secondary Schools.
 6) To find out the significance difference on the Mean values of Awareness
on Metacognition level between students of Government, Aided and
Private Secondary Schools.

7) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the students of secondary school whose
locality is Rural and Urban.

8) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the students of secondary school whose
residence is house and hostel.

9) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level students whose education is Illiterate, Primary and
secondary education.

10) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between the parents of secondary
school students whose occupation is Government, Private and self-
employed.

11) To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between the parents of higher
secondary school students whose annual income is less than 20,000 and
above 20,000.

1.18 HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY:

Hypotheses of the study are as follow:

1. To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level among

the Students of Secondary Schools is average.
2. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of Awareness
on Metacognition level between the Male and Female students of
Secondary Schools.

3. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between the VIII standard and X standard
students of Secondary Schools.

4. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between Science, Arts and Vocational Group
students of Secondary Schools.

5. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between Government, Aided and Private
Secondary School students.

6. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between Rural and Urban area students of
Secondary schools.

7. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between the students from House and Hostel of
Secondary Schools.

8. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the Education level of the Parents of
Secondary School students who are Illiterate, or finished Primary and
Secondary Education.

9. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the Parents of Secondary School
students whose occupation is Government, Private and self-employee.

10. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

 Metacognition level between the Parents of Secondary School Students
whose Annual income is below 20,000 and above 20,000.

1.19 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The study has the following limitations.
1. The study was limited to 6 schools in NILGIRI District only.
2. The study included Government, Government Aided and private schools.
3. The sample was limited to 200 Secondary school students.
4. The study is restricted to a few sub samples namely Gender, Standard,
Group, Type of school, Parents Education, Parents occupation and
parents annual income.

5. Standardized test materials alone were used in this investigation.

1.20 DEFINITION OF THE KEY TERMS

Awareness
It implies knowledge gained through one‘s perceptions or by means of
information.

Metacognition
Ann Brown (1978) defined knowledge of cognition and regulations of
cognitions as the two primary principles of metacognition which are important
of learning knowledge of cognition includes three components of knowledge
namely declarative, procedural and conditional. Regulation of cognition
includes planning, regulation and evaluation.

Secondary School Students

The students those who are studying in standards VIII and X in a formal
10+2+3 Education pattern.

1.21 CONCLUSION
Chapter II deals with Review of Related Literature.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
 CHAPTER-II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 INTRODUCTION
A study of related literature a body of text that aims to review the critical
points of current knowledge including substantive findings as well as
theoretical and methodological contributions to a Particular topic. Literature
reviews are secondary sources, and as such, do not report any new or original
experimental work. Most often associated with academic-oriented literature,
such as a Thesis, a literature review usually precedes a research proposal and
results section. In review of Related studies the researcher attempts to determine
what others have learned about similar Research problems and to gather
information relevant to the research problem at hand. The Review of related
literature serves multiple purposes and is essential to a well-designed research
Study. The key to the vast store house of shed literature may open doors to
sources of significant problems and explanatory hypothesis and provide helpful
orientation for definition of the problem, back ground for selection of procedure
and comparative data for interpretation of results. In order to be truly creative
and original, one must need extensively and critically as a stimuli to thinking
‘says Good (1959).

‗The review of the literature is an important part of the scientific

approach and is carried out in all areas of scientific research whether in the
physical, natural or social sciences. It gives the scholar an understanding of the
previous work that has been done. It provides the means of getting to the
frontiers of knowledge in the particular field of knowledge‘.
 A careful view of the related literature available on the proposed study
was carried out and is presented in this chapter. The studies on metacognition
were found to be less in number and so cognitive style were taken as the review
of literature.
2.2 NEED AND IMPORTANCE OF THE RELATED STUDIES
The review of literature is essential due to the following reasons:
1. One of the early steps in planning a research work is to review
research done previously in the particular area of interest and relevant
area quantitative and qualitative and qualitative analysis of this
research usually gives the worker and indication of the direction.

2. It is very essential for every investigator to be up to date in his own

problem already done by others. It is considered the most important
pre-requisite to actual planning and conducting the study.

3. It avoids the replication of the study of findings to take an advantage

from similar related literature as regards, to methodology. Techniques
of data collecting procedure adopted and conclusions drawn. He can
justify his own endeavor in the field.

4. It provides as source of problem of study an analogy may be drawn for

identifying and selecting his own problem of research.

5. The researcher formulates his hypothesis on the basis of review of

literature. It also provides the rational for the study. The results and
findings of the study can also be discussed of length.

6. The review of literature indicates the clear picture of the problem to be

solved. The scholarship in the field can be developed reviewing in the
literature of the field.

In this chapter ,a review of studies in the field of ―Metacognition‖ has

given.The review has been divided into two major parts, the first part deals with
Metacognition studies related variables done in Abroad and second part deals
with Metacognition studies related variables done in India.

2.3 CLASSIFICATION OF THE STUDIES:

The investigator classified the review of related literature into two sections.
They are the research study conducted in India and research study conducted in
Abroad.16 out of 32 was conducted in India and the remaining was conducted in
Abroad. All the studies were reviewed systematically.

2.3.1 STUDIES DONE IN ABROAD

Elsevir B.V. (2010) Metacognitions of agency were investigated using a
computer task in which X‘s and O‘s streamed from the top of a computer
screen, and the participants moved the mouse to get the cursor to touch the X‘s
and avoid the O‘s. After each 15 s trial, participants made judgments of agency
and judgments of performance. Objective control was either undistorted, or
distorted by (1) Turbulence (i.e., random noise), (2) a Lag between the mouse
and cursor movements (of 250 or 500ms), or (3) ‗Magic,‘ (i.e., an increased
radius around the X‘s for which credit was given). In Experiment 1, college
students‘judgments of agency showed that they were sensitive to all three
manipulations. They also indicated that they felt more in control in the Lag
conditions, where there was a rule on which they could potentially capitalize,
than in the matched Turbulence conditions. In Experiment 2, older adults were
also sensitive to all three manipulations, but less so than the college students.
They were not sensitive to the difference between the Lag and Turbulence
manipulations. Finally, in Experiment 3, 8–10 year-old children were sensitive
to their loss of control equally in the Lag and Turbulence conditions. However,
when performance was artificially improved, in the Magic condition, children
took full credit and showed no evidence that they realized that the results were
due to an external variable. Together, these findings suggest that people‘s
metacognition of agency changes in important ways across the lifespan.
 Zhang & Wu(2009) developed 28-item Survey of Reading Strategies
(SORS) which consists of 3 categories namely :GLOB,PROB, and SUP in order
to assess the metacognitive awareness and reading- strategy use of Chinese
senior high school students who are learning English as a Foreign
Language(EFL).he analysis showed that the students of the whole displayed
characteristics of active strategic readers. They were conscious of their cognitive
process during reading and were able to utilize wide array of EFL reading
strategies to achieve comprehension.

Schneider (2008) followed 174 children from the ages of 3 to 5,

investigating the relationship between theory of mind at age 3 and subsequent
development of meta memory. Theory of mind (ToM) refers to the ―ability to
estimate mental states, such as beliefs, desires, or intentions, and to predict other
people‘s performance based on judgments of their mental states‖ (p. 115).
Schneider also examined the role of language ability in the development of meta
memory. He found that both ToM and language ability increased steadily with
age. Further, there was a strong relationship between language ability and both
ToM and metamemory. Strong language ability at age 3 was a salient predictor
of metamemory at age 5. Schneider hypothesizes that ToM facilitates the
acquisition of metacognitive knowledge and vocabulary in young children,
arguing that ―early ToM competencies can be considered as a precursor of
subsequent metamemory (p. 116). Although results suggest that declarative
metacognitive knowledge tends to increase with age, developmental trends for
procedural metacognitive knowledge, particularly as it relates to monitoring task
demands in relation to abilities, were less clear.

Stewart Cooper and Moulding (2007) studied metacognitive

development in professional educators. This study examined the metacognitive
skills of adults as they develop naturally with age. 214 pre-service and
experienced teachers completed the metacognitive awareness inventory. Results
indicated that metacognition improves significantly with age and with years of
teaching experience. The findings showed male and female participants showed
no significant difference in metacognition, and teachers of grades from
preschool to post-secondary showed no significant difference in metacognition.

Heejung An and Sangkyung Kim (2006) investigated the benefits and

limitations of online group work in a teacher education program. This study
examined the benefits and difficulties that graduate student teachers perceived
while participating in online collaborative group activities during their first year
of a master‘s program. It was discovered that the three most prominent
perceived learning outcomes involved

• The teacher‘s recognition of the value of a supportive learning

community

• The teacher‘s belief that such practices could develop their metacognitive
knowledge and

• The teacher new understands of the constructive use of online

communication tools.

Johanne patry(2004) investigated the effects of short term training in

concept mapping on the development of metacognition. The research was done
with subjects in a 10th grade student‘s physical science course. Through the
course of three types of tests such as a questionnaire on metacognition,
predictive self-evaluation of exam results and ‗thinking aloud‘ problem solving
sessions, it has been found that there were no significant differences between the
subjects who had a short term training in concept mapping without an explicit
accent on metacognitive behaviour and those who had not. Thus in the context
of this study, short-term training in concept mapping has no apparent effect on
the development of metacognition.
 Lean Bowler (2003) studied the methods for revealing the metacognitive
knowledge of adolescent information seekers during the information process.
The study describes the methods used to investigate the metacognitive
knowledge of adolescents; aged 16 to 19 as they searched for selected and used
information for a school-based inquiry project. The study has implications for
information literacy instruction and contributes of the understanding of
adolescent information-seeking behavior.
Schraw &Dennison (2002) studied about the comprehensive scale
assessing various facets of metacognition. Participants were 179 undergraduates
(87women, 92 men) at Midwestern University. Students participated in this
experiment to fulfill class requirements. Ages ranged from 18 years to 40 years.
It has good reliability and validity for metacognition assessment. It effectively
covers various aspects of met cognition in-depth and can also be used to obtain
scores for individual areas of met cognition, such as monitoring, planning,
comprehension, and so on. Participants responded to each item on a 7point scale
ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). The third section was a
demographics and performance measure where students provided demographic
information of age, gender, ethnicity, and year in school as well as their college
GPA (Grade Point Average) and the scale for the GPA from memory.Finally,
students in classes may have performance goals since they have to do well to
pass their classes.

Carlson and Moses (2001) argue that executive functioning may be a

prerequisite skill for the development of metacognition. Inhibitory control (IC)
is ―the ability to inhibit responses to irrelevant stimuli while pursuing a
cognitively represented goal‖ (p. 1033). Studies investigating children‘s IC have
typically used measures such as a child‘s ability to delay gratification or to
suppress dominant impulses to respond to tasks in certain preprogrammed ways
when instructed to do so. Empirical research suggests that significant
development of IC abilities occurs during the first 6 years of life, with
noticeable improvements occurring between the ages of 3 and 6. This
development parallels maturation of the brain, particularly areas responsible for
executive functioning. Carlson and Moses investigated the relationship between
IC and ToM in 107 students from the ages of 3 to 4. They found ToM ability to
significantly improve with age. Further, IC and ToM were significantly related,
even after controlling for age, gender, and verbal ability. The authors speculate,
and found some evidence to support, the possibility that both IC and working
memory capacity mediate the relationship between general executive
functioning and ToM.

Jeni Wilson (1999) studied defining metacognition: a step towards

recognizing metacognition as a worthwhile part of the curriculum. The study
involved 90 interviews of year six students from three different schools. The
study provides details about the theoretical nature of metacognition, empirical
results about metacognitive behavior during mathematical problem solving and
presents a tested model of metacognition. The results show that the sequence of
student metacognitive behavior is predictable regardless of school, class, sex
and task.

Everson & Tobias (1998) studied about metacognitive analysis of

knowledge and performance in college. The study reported that the relationship
between a measure of metacognitive work knowledge (the KMA) and
performance in college. The studies revealed metacognitive ability accurately
estimated one‘s knowledge related to academic achievement in college.

Maqsud(1997) studied effects of metacognitive skills and nonverbal

ability on academic achievement of high school pupils. The study reports the
findings of two experiments conducted with South African senior high school
students to examine the relationships of metacognitive strategies and nonverbal
reasoning ability to test performance in mathematics and English
comprehension. The study suggests that teaching metacognitive strategies to
students who lack such skills may improve their academic performance.

Gregory schraw and David Moshman (1995) investigated the

understanding of people‘s theories about their own cognition. This paper
distinguishes tacit, informal, and formal metacognitive theories and discusses
critical differences among them using criteria borrowed from the developmental
literature.

Schimitt (1990) developed the Metacomprehension Strategy Index to

determine the student‘s levels of strategy awareness namely: predicting,
verifying, previewing purpose setting, self-questioning, Drawing from back
ground knowledge, summarizing and applying fix-up strategies. The results
shown that there was lack of significant difference in the categories as a whole:
there were a few questions that revealed differences between the children who
had successfully completed Reading Recovery and the cohort sample group
with respect knowledge about less effective or item oriented strategies.

Haller et al. (1988) identify three clusters of mental activity inherent in

metacognition within the context of reading comprehension, including
awareness, monitoring, and regulating. According to this framework, awareness
entails recognition of explicit and implicit information and responsiveness to
text dissonance or inaccuracies. Monitoring involves goal setting,
selfquestioning, paraphrasing, activating relevant background knowledge,
making connections between new and previously learned content, and
summarizing to enhance comprehension during reading. Finally, regulating
refers to

―compensatory strategies to redirect and bolster faltering comprehension‖ (p.

6). Paris &Jacob(1984) point out the ―skilled readers often engage in
deliberate activities that require painful thinking ,flexible strategies ,and
periodic self-monitoring, novice readers often seem oblivious to these strategies
and the need to use them‖. The purpose of this paper is to describe the
development of the Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS), an instrument
designed to measure adolescent and adult ESL(English as a Second Language)
students metacognitive awareness and perceived use of reading strategies while
reading academic materials such as textbooks.

2.3.2 STUDIES DONE IN INDIA

Sheeja V. Titus and. P. Annaraja (2011) ―TEACHING COMPETENCY OF
SECONDARY TEACHER EDUCATION STUDENTS IN RELATION TO THEIR
METACOGNITION”, from Xavier‘s College of Education, Palayamkottai, South

India, INDIA. In the presented paper investigators made anattempt to explore

the effectiveness of metacognitive skills in developing the teaching competency
among secondary teacher education students. They described the concept of
metacognition as a higher-order cognitive structure. More specifically,
metacognition is described as an appreciation of what one already knows,
together with a correct apprehension of the learning task and what knowledge
and skills it requires, combined with the ability to make correct inferences about
how to apply one‘s strategic knowledge to a particular situation, and to do so
efficiently and reliably. Students with good metacognition are claimed to be
able to perform efficiently in teaching.

Kaisa Pihlainen-Bednarik and Tuula Keinonen (2010) ,in this

qualitative case study the metacognition of Finnish sixth graders (N=19) was
studied in a virtual learning environment, ENO - Environmental Online. Pupils´
metacognitive knowledge and skills were studied in one ENO course. Education
or sustainable development education. Knowledge about own sensitivity
towards environment, knowledge about own knowledge of environment,
knowing how to act and participate in environment, as well as monitoring the
actions and participation are essential elements in environmental education. This
knowledge is related to metacognition, thus metacognition can be seen as a key
factor in environmental education. Based on the premises of qualitative
research, we do not attempt at a generalization of the findings. Although the
study has been performed in the ENO School, it seems that metacognition found
is not unique only to this context, but could also be seen as metacognition of
sixth graders. Metacognition interacts with many other aspects of student –
abilities, personality, learning style, and so on. The understanding of
metacognition will probably be most useful if it is complemented by an
understanding of these other aspects of stu-dents´ functioning, and of how they
interact with metacognition (Sternberg, 1998). Further re-search might focus
on the dependencies of these factors with metacognitive knowledge and skills.
Another interesting focus of future research might be to study ENO pupils in
different countries, from the viewpoint of metacognition. Furthermore, it might
also be useful to repeat the study of metacognition in the context of another
ENO course but with a different theme. Understanding pupils´ metacognition
helps to develop metacognitive activities in the ENO-school as well as in other
learning environments.

Mojtaba Magusudi and Seyed Hassan Talebi(2009)- this study showed

that Mono/bilingual students differed significantly in their metacognitive as
well as their total cognitive/metacognitive strategy scores, meaning that
bilinguals had significantly higher scores than monolinguals, while no
significant difference was found between monolinguals and bilinguals in
cognitive strategies. Further, students with high proficiency had significantly
higher scores than students with low proficiency in their cognitive,
metacognitive as well as their total cognitive/metacognitive strategy scores.
However, the inter-action effect between linguality and proficiency is found to
be non-significant in cognitive, meta-cognitive as well as total
cognitive/metacognitive strategies. The vignettes used for the process were
beneficial.
 V. Job Kuruvilla and B. Mukhopadhyay(2008) -investigated the
CLP(creative Learning Processes) model evolved after the study was found to
be very useful in fostering creative talents among engineering students to the
teachers as well as students, for evaluation of creative higher order learning
domains. It also made complex concepts easy and simple for knowledge
assimilation by students. The model could be tried in more engineering
college‘s located indifferent parts of the country, for evaluating its effectiveness
among a spectrum of students of varying cognitive abilities. More vignettes
could be written, covering all subjects taught in engineering, and made available
to the students and teachers, so that learning process can take place not only in
the classroom, but also in home environment, stimulating the insight and
curiosity .

Mishra &Agrawal, (2001) Quranic schools, often known as maqtab,

have served as the traditional institutions of teaching and learning for the
Muslim community. Quranic schooling in the present days refers to elementary
or intermediate levels of traditional education, which provide the learner with
the basic skills of reading and writing in Arabic, elementary notion of grammar
and knowledge of Islamic law. It also requires children to memorize part or all
of the Quran. Great emphasis is placed on rote learning.

Mishra, Shukla and A. Mishra (1999) -examined learning and memory

in schooled and unschooled children, aged 7-12 years, controlling for the effect
of socio-economic background. Using verbal learning tasks in a free recall
procedure with unrelated, conceptually related, and phonetically related words,
the authors demonstrated that the effects of schooling were age and taskspecific.
The overall recall and clustering scores of schooled children were higher than
those of the unschooled, particularly on the conceptual task. Performed
markedly better on all tasks except rhyme recognition suggesting that schooling
strengthens metalinguistic awareness.
 Dash, Kantha, and Singh (1995) -examined the influence of schooling
on sensitivity to the formal properties of language by comparing small samples
of schooled and unschooled children, aged 10-12 years, on five metalinguistic
awareness tasks. They completed rhyme recognition, arbitrariness of language,
symbol substitution, word creation and linguistic ambiguity tasks. Results
revealed that schooled children.

Shukla (1993) -analyzed the responses of children aged 4-12 years on

five pictorial tasks. Children of high facility (good) schools generally performed
better on tests than their low facility (ordinary) school counterparts. Factor
analysis revealed that the perception of pictures was characterized by three sets
of factors, namely "perceptual segregation," "cognitive operations," and "logical
representation," all of which were significantly promoted by high facility school
attendance. Combining pictorial and linguistic measures, Mohanty and Mohanty
(1985) investigated the effect of preschool experience on the linguistic and
cognitive skills of 3.5 to 5 year old children; 30 children were enrolled in a
preschool program and 30 children had received no formal school training.
Draw-a-design and draw-a-child tasks were used, and children's comprehension
and production of Oriya locative sentences were interpreted as measures of
linguistic development. Results showed that the preschool children performed
significantly better than the unschooled children on all measures.

Mohanty (1992)- a study for linguistic, and metalinguistic tasks, even

when differences in intelligence are controlled with unschooled bilingual and
unilingual children showed no significant difference in metalinguistic skills.
The metalinguistic hypothesis of bilinguals' superiority in cognition needs to be
re-examined in the context of the effect of schooling on metalinguistic
processes.

Kurtz (1990)- reported a study on memory performance and

metamemory in 120 schooled and unschooled six and eight years old children
in Nagpur, Maharastra. The two groups were matched on socioeconomic status
and IQ. No difference was found on metamemory tasks, but on a serial
rehearsal task.

Kurtz, Borkowski, & Deshmukh, (1988)-the schooled children

rehearsed more, which is consistent with the emphasis the Indian teachers were
found to place on rote memorization When trained to cluster and to rehearse,
schooled children improved more on clustering, rehearsal, and recall measures
than did no schooled children. Among schooled children, number of years of
schooling predicted performance on two of the memory tasks in regression
equations with age controlled. The negative result regarding metamemory was
attributed to the fact that even the schooled children had received little
schooling, or alternatively to a lack of sensitivity of the metamemory test.

Mohanty and Das (1987) - studied the impact of bilingualism on

cognitive and metalinguistic abilities and the relationship between the two
abilities among tribal Kond children. Twenty unilingual and 20 bilinguals in
each group, one composed of 7-year-olds and the other of 9- year-olds, were
administered metalinguistic tasks, Piagetian conservation tasks, and the Raven's
Colored Progressive Matrices. Analysis of variance showed significant effects
of bilingualism and age on Raven scores, but not on conservation scores. The
effect of bilingualism on metalinguistic ability was not significant. Findings
support the claim that metalinguistic ability is school-related and that
bilingualism alone does not promote it.

Paul (1986) -studied cognitive style in related to age, achievement, and home
environment and social-class membership.

A.S. Dash and Rath (1985) -found that the rate of learning could be
improved by preschooling. Small samples of schooled no disadvantaged (SND)
and non-schooled disadvantaged (NSD) 4-5 year old children were given
training on a battery of cognitive tasks for eight weeks. The children were
trained in sequential thinking, figure ground perception, shape discrimination,
visual recall, and visual discrimination. Four cognitive tests were administered
twice, before training and after training, including the Visual Reception and the
Visual Association subtests of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities and

Draw-A-Design and Draw-A-Child Tests from the McCarthy Scales of

Children's Abilities. All children showed significant improvement on cognitive
tasks following training, but the rate of improvement was greater for NSD
compared to SND children, which is in favor of the leveling effect of schooling.

Kumar (1984)- studied cognitive style constitutes another dimension of

the information-processing variables. Science students of the university level
were more field independent than arts/commerce students. Language students
were field dependent.

Lakshmi (1982) -reported a very intensive study on cognitive

competence in infancy. The major findings were: the psycho meter
development index was different in carious age and SES groups. It was not
related to nutritional status material cognitive stimulation and the child‘s
cognitive competence were related several other antecedent conditions were also
recognized.

2.4 CONCLUSION
Chapter III deals with Analysis and Interpretations of data.
METHODOLGY
 CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Research is an original contribution to the existing stock of knowledge
making for its advancement .It is the pursuit of truth with the help of study,
observation, comparison and experiment. In short, the search for knowledge
through objective and systematic method of finding solution to a problem is
research. The systematic approach concerning generalization and the
formulation of theory is also a research.

This chapter describes in detail the design of the study, psychological

tools used for the study, nature and selection of the sample and a brief
description of the procedure adopted for the collection of data for its scoring and
classification. Choosing a design for a study basically involves selecting the
most appropriate methods of techniques to solve the particular problem under
investigation. Finally the proposed statistical

l treatment of the data for testing the hypothesis that were formulated is
explained.

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN OF THE STUDY:

Table 3.1 Schematic Representation of the study
S.NO. CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION

1 Nature of Research Survey Method

2 Sampling design and Method : Random sampling

size
Size : 200 Students
3 Tool used TOOL: Metacognitive Awareness of Reading
Strategies Inventory constructed by Mokhtari
and Reichard (2002)
 SCORING PROCEDURE: 5 - Point scale consists
of 30 statements with 5 alternative responses for
each statement as never, occasionally ,some times,
usually, always

Variables 1. Gender
4 2. Standard
3.Group
4. Type of school
5. Residence of Student
6. Area of Student
7. Parents Education
8. Parents Occupation
9.Parents annual income
5 Statistical 1. Mean (M)
Techniques used 2. Standard Deviation (SD)
3. ‗t‘ Test
4. ‗F‘ Test
3.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:
Objectives of the study are as follow
1. To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level among
the students of Higher Secondary Schools.

2. To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level among

the Higher Secondary School students with respect to the demographic
variables such as Gender, Standard, Group, Type of school, Residence
of student, Area of student, Parents Education, Parent‘s occupation and
Parents annual income.
3. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness
on Metacognition level between the Male and Female students of
Secondary Schools.

4. To find the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the VIII standard and X standard students
of Secondary Schools.

5. To find the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level students of Secondary Schools.

6. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between the students of Government, Aided and
Private Secondary Schools.

7. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between the students of Secondary School
whose Locality is Rural and Urban.

8. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between the students of Secondary School
whose Residence is House and Hostel.

9. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between the parents of Higher Secondary
School students whose Education is Illiterate, Primary and secondary
Education.

10. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness
on Metacognition level between the parents of Secondary School
students whose occupation is Government, Private, and self-employed.
11. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness
on Metacognition level between the parents of Secondary School
students whose Annual income is less than 20,000 and above 20,000.

3.4 HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

Hypotheses of the study are as follow
1. To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level
among the students of Secondary Schools is average.

2. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between the Male and Female
Students of Secondary Schools.

3. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between the VIII standard and X
standard students of Secondary Schools.

4. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between Science, Arts and
Vocational Group students of Secondary Schools.

5. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between Government, Aided and
Private Secondary School Students.

6. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between Rural and Urban area
students of Secondary Schools.

7. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness son Metacognition level between the students from House
and Hostel of Secondary School.
 8. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on
Metacognition level between the Education level of the Parents of
Higher Secondary School students who are Illiterate, or finished
Primary and secondary Education.

9. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the Parents of Secondary School
students whose occupation is Government, Private and self-employee.

10. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the Parents of Higher Secondary
School students whose Annual income is below 20,000 and above
20,000.

3.5 SAMPLING DESIGN AND SIZE

Table 3.2 List of schools and its size of samples

S.NO. NAME OF THE SCHOOL SAMPLE

SIZE

1 GOVERNMENT HIGHER 34
SECONDARY SCHOOL, COONOOR

2 GOVERNMENT HIGHER 33
SECONDARY SCHOOL, UBATHLAI

3 ST.ANTONYS HIGHER SECONDARY 33

SCHOOL-COONOOR

4 GOVERNMENT HIGHER 33
SECONDARY SCHOOL-OOTY
 5 SRI SARGURU HIGHER SECONDRY 33
SCHOOL COONOOR

6 STANES HIGHER SECONDARY 34

SCHOOL,COONOOR

3.6 VARIABLES:
Variables used in this study are
Table 3.3 Distribution of the Table

S.NO. VARIABLES SUB – VARIABLES SAMPLES

1 GENDER MALE 101

FEMALE 99
2 STANDARD 11TH STANDARD 101
12TH STANDARD 99
3 LOCALITY RURAL 107
URBAN 93
4 RESIDENCE HOME 153
HOSTEL 47
5 GROUP SCIENCE 64
ARTS 66
VOCATIOAL 70
6 TYPE OF SCHOOL GOVERNMENT 68
GOVERNMENT AIDED 65
PRIVATE 67
7 PARENTS ANNUAL INCOME BELOW 20,000 133
ABOVE 20,000 67
8 PARENTS EDUCATION ILLITERATE 68
PRIMARY EDUCATION 76
HIGHER EDUCATION 56
9 GOVERNMENT 28
PARENT‘S OCCUPATION
PRIVATE 42
 SELF EMPLOYED 130

3.7 INSTRUMENTATION
The scoring in the tool Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies
inventory were never or almost never, occasionally ,sometimes,
usually ,always or almost always. The scoring procedures meant for the tool
were given as 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively. The item present in the tool which
was classified under 3 dimensions contains 13 items, 8 items and 9 items
respectively with each dimension. Higher scores determine the greater ability.
The total scoring for the 30 items with the indicated scores come to 150, each
components of total were tabulated.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE 30 ITEMS IN METACOGNITIVE

AWARENESS OF READING STRATEGIES INVENTORY
Dimension Items number
Global reading Strategies 1,3,4,7,10,14,17,19,22,23,25,26,29

Problem Solving Strategies 8,11,13,16,18,21,27,30

Support Reading Strategies 2,5,6,9,12,15,20,24,28

SCORING TABLE

never occasionally sometimes usually always

1 2 3 4 5
3.8 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITYOF THE TOOLS
The internal consistency reliability coefficients (as determined by
Cronbach‘s alpha) for its three subscales, which were based on the results of a
series of factor analyses, were as follows:

Global Reading Strategies (0.92), Problem solving Strategies (0.79), and

Support Reading Strategies (0.87).The reliability for the overall scale was 0.93.
3.9 COLLECTION OF DATA
To collect the data for the present study the investigator visited 6 schools.
After obtaining the permission of the heads of the institutions and with the
cooperation of the teaching staff the investigator administered the test. Before
administering the test clear instructions and directions as to how the test items
should be responded were given to the students. Xerox copies of the tools were
distributed. Metacognitive Awareness of Reading strategies Inventory
(MARSI) was administered after explaining the purpose of the test. The time
schedule for MARSI was between 20 minutes and 30 minutes.

3.10 STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES USED

Statistical techniques are extensively used in educational research. They
provide an indispensable tool for collecting, organizing, analyzing and
interpreting data expressed in numerical terms.

Statistical methods use measurement as the most precise and universally

accepted method for assigning quantitative values to the characteristics or
properties of objects or events for the purpose of discovering relationships
between variables under study.

The investigator used the descriptive statistical measures based on the

characteristics of the sample or population in totality.

The investigator analyze the hypotheses based on the computations of a.

Mean

b. Standard Deviation
c. t‘- Test
d. F -test
i) Mean
The Mean of a distribution is commonly understood as the arithmetic
average. The Mean of a set of observations or scores is obtained by dividing the
sum of all the values by the total number of values. The investigator found the
Mean for a grouped data and the formula is

Where,
𝑀=𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛
= Sum of
X = Scores in a distribution
N = Total number of scores
The Mean value for government, government aided and Matriculation
schools are calculated through this formula.

ii)Standard Deviation

Though measures of central tendency are very useful in describing the nature of
a distribution of measures the researcher will not get a complete picture of data.
For more analysis the measure of variability is used which is also called the
measure of spread or dispersion.

For the ungrouped data the average of squared deviations of measures of

scores from their mean called variable is evaluated for the study. The standard
deviation is the positive square root of variable. Standard deviation is the
sequence root of the arithmetic mean of the sequences of the deviation from the
arithmetic mean.
 Where,
=Standard Deviation f=frequency,

,
x=mid value,
A=Assumed mean, c=class
interval,

N=number of sample.
iii)„t‟ -Test
The ―t‖ test has wide number of application in research. It is used to test
the significance of difference between the value of ―t‖ is 1.96 and above, the
difference between the mean is significant at 0.05 level mean of the two
independent groups. By using the mean and standard deviation of the two
group’s ―t‖ value is calculated. If the calculated value of ―t‖ is 2.59 and above
the difference between mean is significant at 0.01 levels. Formula

Where,
𝑀1 and 𝑀2=Mean1 and Mean2,
S1 and S2=Standard Deviation of 1 and Standard Deviation of 2,
𝑁1 and 𝑁2=Number of sample1 and Number of sample2.

The statistical techniques use here are ‗t‘-test and‘-test for testing the
hypotheses with the help of software package namely SPSS(Statistical Package
for Social Science) iv)„F‟ test:
 In the honor of statistician R.S.Fisher, the variance ratio test is named
‗F‘-test.The main aim of this ‗F‘-test is to determine the two independent
estimates of population variance differ significantly mathematically.

F=S12
S22
Where S12=∑(X1-X)2

N1-N
S22=∑(X2-X)2

N2-N
F=Larger Estimate of variance

Smaller Estimate of variance

The, F‘ value is compared with the values of, F‘given in the table appropriate
degree of freedom and at required level of significance.

3.11 CONCLUSION
Chapter III ends with samples, methods, tool and lead to deal with the
Succeeding analysis of data. Further analysis and interpretation of data are
presented in the next chapter.
 ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION

OF DATA
 CHAPTER – IV
DATA ANALYSIS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The Chapter IV deals with the analysis of data. The collection of data
through the questionnaire was analyzed systematically. Statistical techniques
such as Mean, SD and, t‘ test were applied to analyze the data to draw the
meaningful findings. The analyzed results are presented in the following tables
under different headings.

4.2 HYPOTHESES TESTING

ANALYSIS OF THE MEAN SCORE ON THE LEVEL OF AWARENESS ON
METACOGNITION
4.2.1 Analysis of the Mean Scores and the Standard Deviation on the
level of Awareness on Metacognition among the Secondary School

Students in NILGIRI District in Total

Hypothesis -1
The level of Awareness on Metacognition among the Secondary School
Students in NILGIRI District is average.
 Table 4.1
MEAN AND THE STANDARD DEVIATION SCORES ON THE LEVEL OF AWARENESS
ON METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN
NILGIRI DISTRICT IN TOTAL
High Medium

Solving Mean

Solving Mean
Overall Mean

Overall Mean
Global Mean

Global Mean
Strategies
Variables

Problem
Problem

strategy
Support

Support
Mean
S. No

N
1 Total 107 80.44 78.9 83.66 78.84 4 63.22 63.6 65.01 62.66
5
2 Gender Male 52 79.83 77.6 84.13 77.64 49 63.37 63.15 65.54 62.76
3 Female 55 81.02 80.0 83.23 79.97 44 63.04 64.27 64.40 62.56
4 Class Standard
57 80.74 80.1 83.67 78.28 44 62.68 62.79 64.25 61.19
IX
5 Standard
50 80.10 77.5 83.66 79.47 49 63.66 64.41 65.64 63.90
X
6 Locality Rural 59 80.84 79.3 84.14 79.16 48 63.53 64.30 64.46 64.35
7 Urban 48 79.95 78.4 83.07 78.44 45 62.90 63.04 65.55 60.98
8 Residen Home 70 80.22 78.2 83.46 79.30 83 63.28 63.59 65.34 62.33
9 ce Hostel 37 80.87 80.2 84.04 77.96 10 62.54 64.57 61.11 66.68
10 Parental Below 76 80.62 78.7 83.55 79.94 57 64.27 64.42 65.94 64.44
Income 20,000
11 Above
31 79.99 79.3 83.97 76.01 36 61.41 62.38 63.39 59.60
20,000
12 Group Science 29 81.35 80.1 82.89 80.99 35 62.51 62.91 64.49 61.98
13 Arts 38 80.70 79.2 84.32 78.00 28 63.09 65.39 64.39 63.70
14 Vocationa
40 79.51 77.7 83.58 78.07 30 64.16 62.96 66.19 62.51
l
15 Type of Governme 26 80.20 78.5 82.55 80.18 42 63.68 62.85 65.11 63.12
School nt
16 Aided 36 79.59 77.3 84.45 76.57 29 62.36 63.71 65.77 61.69
17 Private 45 81.28 80.4 83.64 79.95 22 63.53 65.19 63.75 63.16
18 Parental Illiterate 35 79.58 78.0 82.11 78.28 33 64.29 63.80 66.61 63.69
Educati
19 Primary 43 80.34 78.5 84.23 79.01 33 63.52 64.10 64.52 63.30
on
Education

20 Higher
29 81.63 80.5 84.71 79.24 27 61.60 63.02 63.67 60.72
Education
21 Parental Governme 12 82.20 81.9 85.92 78.78 16 63.84 60.81 67.73 62.21
Occupat nt
22 ion Private 16 80.35 78.5 82.15 79.52 26 63.54 63.07 65.63 62.16
23 Self-
79 80.22 78.5 83.68 78.70 51 62.89 64.70 64.00 63.03
Employed

From the table 4.1 it is understood that overall Mean value of the total
sample were 80.44 and 63.22. The obtained Mean value is 82.20 out of
maximum value of 100. It shows that the Awareness on Metacognition among
the Secondary School Students is high. So the framed hypothesis is rejected.

4.2.2 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on Metacognition

among the Secondary School Students in NILGIRI District with respect to
their Gender

Hypothesis -2
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition between the Male and Female Students of the
Secondary Schools in NILGIRI District.
 Table 4.2
„t‟ VALUES IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE AWARENESS LEVEL OF
METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH
RESPECT TO THEIR GENDER

High Medium

„t‟ „t‟
Gender N Mean SD value N Mean SD value

Overall Male 52 79.838 6.5829 0.939** 49 63.375 5.0564 0.344**

Female 55 81.022 6.4507 44 63.048 3.7821

Global Male 52 77.692 9.1207 1.453** 49 63.150 7.9408 0.650**

Female 55 80.098 7.9935 44 64.271 8.4172

Problem- Male 52 84.131 7.8830 0.578** 49 65.542 9.1992 0.593**

Solving
Female 55 83.233 8.1818 44 64.405 8.9253

Support - Male 52 77.642 8.5168 1.344** 49 62.762 7.6090 0.123**

Strategy
Female 55 79.975 9.3766 44 62.562 7.8870

** - Not Significant at 0.05 level

As it is seen that the calculated ,t‘ value 0.939, 1.453, 0.578, 1.344,
0.344,0.650, 0.593 and 0.123 is less than the table value 1.96 from the above
table 4.2, it is not significant at 0.05 level. It is understood from the results that
there is no significant difference of the Male and Female Students with respect
to the high and medium level of Awareness on Metacognition. Male and female
Secondary School Students are having similar level of Awareness on
Metacognition. Hence the framed null hypothesis is accepted.
 4.2.3 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on
Metacognition among the Secondary School Students in NILGIRI

District with respect to their Class

Hypothesis -3
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary Schools
in NILGIRI District with respect to their Class.

Table 4.3
„t‟ VALUES IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE AWARENESS LEVEL OF
METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH RESPECT
TO THEIR CLASS

High Medium

Class N Mean SD „t‟ N Mean SD „t‟

value value
Overall Standard IX 57 80.744 6.7000 0.502** 44 62.688 4.8390 1.034**

Standard X 50 80.108 6.3406 49 63.669 4.1642

Global Standard IX 57 80.112 8.3601 1.528** 44 62.790 8.2564 0.941**

Standard X 50 77.580 8.7632 49 64.412 8.0508

Problem- Standard IX 57 83.677 7.6003 0.011** 44 64.259 9.2065 0.721**

Solving Standard X 50 83.660 8.5366 49 65.641 8.9435

Support Standard IX 57 78.284 9.9238 0.681** 44 61.190 8.0784 1.684**

-
Standard X 50 79.476 7.8761 49 63.906 7.2132
Strategy
** - Not Significant at 0.05 level

As it is seen that the calculated, ,t‘ value 0.502, 1.528, 0.011,0.681, 1.034,
0.941, 0.721 and 1.684 are less than the table value 1.96 from the above table
4.3, it is not significant at 0.05 level. It is understood from the results that there
is no significant difference of the Standard IX and Standard X Students with
respect to the high and medium level of Awareness on Metacognition. Standard
IX and Standard X Secondary School Students are having similar level of
Awareness on Metacognition. Hence the framed null hypothesis is accepted.

4.2.4 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on Metacognition

among the Secondary School Students in NILGIRI District with respect to
their Group

Hypothesis -4
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary Schools in
NILGIRI District with respect to their Group.

Table 4.4
SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE
AWARENESS LEVEL OF METACOGNITION AMONG
SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH RESPECT TO THEIR GROUP
High Medium

Sum of Mean Sum of Mean

Squares Square Squares Square
Group df F df F
Overall Between
59.947 2 29.973 43.111 2 21.555
Groups
1.073**
Within 0.703**
4434.580 105 42.640 1747.405 91 20.085
Groups

Total 4494.526 107 1790.516 93

Global Between 102.603 2 51.302 0.689** 114.057 2 57.028 0.858**

Groups
 Within
7745.017 105 74.471 5782.539 91 66.466
Groups

Total 7847.620 107 5896.596 93

Problem- Between 34.529 2 17.264 59.933 2 29.966

Solving Groups
0.361**
Within 0.265**
6771.079 105 65.107 7212.496 91 82.902
Groups

Total 6805.608 107 7272.429 93

Support - Between 184.332 2 92.166 45.667 2 22.833

Strategy Groups
0.380**
Within 1.140**
8408.127 105 80.847 5226.826 91 60.078
Groups

Total 8592.459 107 5272.493 93

** - Not Significant at 0.05 level

* - Significant at 0.05 level

Table 4.4 reveals that the F value 0.703, 0.689, 0.265, 1.140, 1.073, 0.858,
0.361and 0.380 is not significant at 0.05 levels. It is understood from the results
that there is no significant difference among Secondary School Students towards
High and Medium level of Awareness on Metacognition with respect to their
group. Hence the framed null hypothesis is accepted.

4.2.5 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on

Metacognition among the Secondary School Students in NILGIRI

District with respect to their Type of School

Hypothesis -5
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary Schools
in NILGIRI District with respect to their Type of School.

Table 4.5
SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE
AWARENESS LEVEL OF METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL
STUDENTS WITH RESPECT TO THEIR TYPE OF SCHOOL
Type of High Medium
School Sum of Mean Sum of Mean
Squares Square Squares Square
df F df F
Overall Between
59.968 2 29.984 31.699 2 15.850
Groups

Within 0.703** 0.784**

4434.558 105 42.640 1758.816 91 20.216
Groups

Total 4494.526 107 1790.516 93

Global Between
201.612 2 100.806 75.491 2 37.746
Groups

Within 1.371** 0.564**

7646.009 105 73.519 5821.105 91 66.909
Groups

Total 7847.620 107 5896.596 93

Problem Between 54.349 2 27.174 50.818 2 25.409

-
Groups
Solving
Within 0.419** 0.306**
6751.260 105 64.916 7221.611 91 83.007
Groups

Total 6805.608 107 7272.429 93

Support Between 290.412 2 145.206 41.052 2 20.526

-Strategy Groups

Within 1.819** 0.341**

8302.047 105 79.827 5231.440 91 60.131
Groups

Total 8592.459 107 5272.493 93

** - Not Significant at 0.05 level
Table 4.5 reveals that the F value 0.703, 1.371, 0.419, 1.819, 0.784, 0.564,
0.306 and 0.341 is not significant at 0.05 levels. It is understood from the
results that there is no significant difference among Secondary School
 Students towards High and Medium level of Awareness on Metacognition
with respect to their Type of School. Hence the framed null hypothesis is
accepted.

4.2.6 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on

Metacognition among the Secondary School Students in Nilgiri

District with respect to their Locality

Hypothesis -6
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary Schools
in NILGIRI District with respect to their Locality.

Table 4.6

„t‟ VALUES IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE AWARENESS LEVEL OF

METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
WITH RESPECT TO THEIR LOCALITY
High Medium

N Mean SD „t‟ N Mean SD „t‟

Locality value value

Overall Rural 59 80.847 6.6328 0.704** 48 63.538 4.5714 0.665**

Urban 48 79.954 6.3944 45 62.907 4.4263

Global Rural 59 79.322 8. 0.522** 48 64.302 7.5643 0.731**

3402

Urban 48 78.446 8.9833 45 63.044 8.7170

Problem- Rural 59 84.149 8.0109 0.685** 48 64.467 9.2804 0.569**

Solving
Urban 48 83.079 8.0599 45 65.556 8.8629

Support - Rural 59 79.163 8.3484 0.408** 48 64.356 7.8771 2.119*

Strategy Urban 48 78.446 9.8245 45 60.982 7.2084

** - Not Significant at 0.05 level

* - Significant at 0.05 level
 From the table 4.6 shows that the‗t‘ values, 0.704, 0.522, 0.685, 0.408,
0.665, 0.731 and 0.569 are not significant at 0.05 level, whereas 2.119 is
significant at 0.05 level . It is understood from the results that there is no
significant difference among Rural and Urban Students with respect to the high
and medium level of Awareness on Metacognition. Rural Secondary

School Students are having more level of Awareness on Metacognition than the
Urban Higher Secondary School Students in Support strategy at medium level.

Hence the framed null hypothesis is rejected.

Graph 4.1
BAR DIAGRAM SHOWING THE MEAN SCORES ON THE
AWARENESS LEVEL OF METACOGNITION WITH RESPECT TO
 THEIR LOCALITY

70
65.55
62.9 64.3 64.46 64.35
63.53 63.04 60.98
60

50

40
Mean

Rural
30 Urban

20

10

0 Overall Global Problem-Solving Support -Strategy

4.2.7 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on

Metacognition among the Secondary School Students in NILGIRI

District with respect to their Residential

Hypothesis -7
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary Schools
in NILGIRI District with respect to their Residential.
 Table 4.7
„t‟ VALUES IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE AWARENESS
LEVEL
OF METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL
STUDENTS WITH RESPECT TO THEIR RESIDENCE
High Medium

N Mean SD „t‟ N Mean SD „t‟ value

Residence value
Overall Home
70 80.220 7.2450 0.494** 83 63.280 4.2997 0.415**

Hostel 37 80.876 4.8941 10 62.543 6.7208

Global Home
70 78.237 9.4629 1.146** 83 63.598 8.1232 0.302**

Hostel 37 80.238 6.6082 10 64.571 8.9409

Problem- Home 70 83.469 8.1735 0.355** 83 65.340 8.7955 1.190**

Solving
Hostel 37 84.049 7.7956 10 61.114 11.6447

Support - Home 70 79.303 9.7348 0.728** 83 62.330 7.3597 1.447**

Strategy
Hostel 37 77.968 7.4728 10 66.686 10.8664
**-NotSignificantat0.05level
*- Significant at 0.05 level
From the table 4.7 that the‗t‘ values, 0.494, 1.146, 0.355, 0.728, 0.415,
0.302, 1.190, and 1.447 are not significant at 0.05 level. It is understood from
the results that there is no significant difference among Home and Hostel
Students with respect to the high, medium and low level of Awareness on
Metacognition at Overall, Global and problem-Solving strategy. Secondary
School Students who are staying at Home are having more level of
 Awareness on Metacognition than the Secondary School Students who are
staying at Hostel. Hence the framed null hypothesis is accepted.

4.2.8 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on

Metacognition among the Secondary School Students in NILGIRI

District with respect to their Parental Education

Hypothesis -8
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary Schools
in Nilgiri District with respect to their Parental Education.

Table 4.8
SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE
AWARENESS LEVEL OF METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY
SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH RESPECT TO THEIR PARENTAL EDUCATION
Parental High Medium
Education Sum of Mean Sum of Mean
Squares Square Squares Square
df F df F
Overall Between
67.444 2 33.722 109.944 2 54.972
Groups

Within 0.792** 2.846**

4427.083 105 42.568 1680.571 91 19.317
Groups

Total 4494.526 107 1790.516 93

Global Between
112.871 2 56.435 0.759** 17.741 2 8.870 0.131**
Groups
 Within
7734.749 105 74.373 5878.855 91 67.573
Groups

Total 7847.620 107 5896.596 93

Problem Between 129.704 2 64.852 137.728 2 68.864
-
Groups
Solving
Within 1.010** 0.840**
6675.904 105 64.191 7134.701 91 82.008
Groups

Total 6805.608 107 7272.429 93

Support Between 16.959 2 8.479 148.013 2 74.006
-
Groups
Strategy
Within 0.103** 1.256**
8575.500 105 82.457 5124.480 91 58.902
Groups

Total 8592.459 107 5272.493 93

** - Not Significant at 0.05 level
* - Significant at 0.05 level

Table 4.8 reveals that the F value is 2.846, 0.792, 0.759, 1.010, 0.103,
0.131, 0.840 and 1.256 is not significant at 0.05 levels. It is understood from the
results that there is no significant difference among Secondary School Students
towards High and Medium level of Awareness on Metacognition with respect to
their Parental Education. Hence the framed null hypothesis is accepted.

4.2.9 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on Metacognition

among the Secondary School Students in Nilgiri District with respect to
their Parental Occupation

Hypothesis -9
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary
Schools in Nilgiri District with respect to their Parental Occupation

Table 4.9
SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE AWARENESS
LEVEL OF METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
 WITH RESPECT TO THEIR PARENTAL OCCUPATION
Parental High Medium
Occupation
Sum of df Mean F Sum of df Mean F
Squares Square Squares Square

Overall Between
Groups 37.925 2 18.963 0.443** 13.149 2 6.574 0.322**

Within Groups 4456.601 105 42.852 1777.367 91 20.430

Total 4494.526 107 1790.516 93

Global Between
Groups 112.914 2 56.457 0.759** 169.805 2 84.902 1.290**

Within Groups 7734.706 105 74.372 5726.791 91 65.825

Total
7847.620 107 5896.596 93

Problem- Between 95.183 2 47.591 0.738** 158.823 2 79.411 0.971**

Solving Groups

Within Groups 6710.426 105 64.523 7113.606 91 81.766

Total 6805.608 107 7272.429 93

Support - Between 9.638 2 4.819 0.058** 16.509 2 8.255 0.137**

Strategy Groups

Within Groups 8582.822 105 82.527 5255.984 91 60.414

Total 8592.459 107 5272.493 93

** - Not Significant at 0.05 level

Table 4.9 reveals that the F value 0.443, 0.759, 0.738, 0.058, 0.322,
1.290, 0.971and 0.137 is not significant at 0.05 levels. It is understood from the
results that there is no significant difference among Secondary School

Students towards High and Medium level of Awareness on Metacognition with

respect to their Parental Occupation. Hence the framed null hypothesis is
accepted.
4.2.10 Significance of difference on the level of Awareness on Metacognition
among the Secondary School Students in Nilgiris

District with respect to their Parental Income

Hypothesis -10
There is no significant difference towards the Mean values on the level of
Awareness on Metacognition among the Students of the Secondary Schools in
Nilgiri District with respect to their Parental Income.

Table 4.10
„t‟ VALUES IN THE MEAN SCORES ON THE AWARENESS LEVEL OF
METACOGNITION AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
WITH RESPECT TO THEIR PARENTAL INCOME
Parental High Medium
Income
N Mean SD „t‟ N Mean SD „t‟
value value
Overall Below 20,000
76 80.623 6.7015 0.448** 57 64.270 4.0865 3.045*

Above 31 79.993 6.0821 36 61.412 4.6255

20,000
Global Below 20,000
76 78.774 8.8586 0.297** 57 64.421 8.2090 1.147**

Above 31 79.327 8.0450 36 62.382 7.9764

20,000
Problem- Below 20,000 76 83.551 7.7659 0.244** 57 65.947 8.9542 1.296**
Solving

Above 31 83.973 8.7460 36 63.394 9.0936

20,000
Support - Below 20,000 76 79.943 8.2004 2.059* 57 64.446 7.0216 3.005*
Strategy

Above 31 76.013 10.4195 36 59.600 7.9467

20,000
** - Not Significant at 0.05 level
* - Significant at 0.05 level

As it is seen that the calculated ‘value 0.448, 0.297, 0.244, 1.147 and
1.296 are less than the table value 1.96 from the above table 4.6, it is not
significant at 0.05 level. Whereas 2.059, 3.045 and 3.005 are more than the table
value 1.96, it is not significant at 0.05 level. It is understood from the results
that there is no significant difference of the Parental Income below 20,000 and
above 20,000 with respect to the high, medium and low level of Awareness on
Metacognition. Parental Income below 20,000 and above 20,000 is having
similar level of Awareness on Metacognition. The students whose parents are
earning below 20,000 are having high level of Awareness on Metacognition
than the students whose parents are earning above 20,000 at support strategy at
high level, overall strategy and support strategy at medium level. Hence the
framed null hypothesis is rejected.
 Graph 4.2

BAR DIAGRAM SHOWING THE MEAN SCORES ON THE HIGH LEVEL OF

AWARENESS ON METACOGNITION WITH RESPECT TO THEIR PARENTAL
INCOME

90
83.973
83.551
79.993 79.943
80.623 78.774
80 79.327
76.013

70

60

50
Mean

40 Below
20,000

30 Above
20,000

20

10

0 Overall Global Problem-Solving Support -Strategy

 Graph 4.3
BAR DIAGRAM SHOWING THE MEAN SCORES ON THE
MEDIUM LEVEL OF AWARENESS ON METACOGNITION WITH
RESPECT TO THEIR PARENTAL INCOME

70
64.421 65.947 64.446
64.27 61.412 63.394
62.382
60 59.6

50

40
Mean

Below
30 20,000

Above
20 20,000

10

0
Overall Global Problem-Solving Support
Strategy

 CONCLUSION
Chapter V deals with Summary of Findings and conclusions
SUMMARY OF THE WORK DONE FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESSTIONS FOR
FURTHER RESEARCH
 CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Research is an intelligent searching for facts and their meanings or
implications with reference to a given problem. The product of findings of a
given piece of research should be an authentic verifiable and contribution to
knowledge in the field studied. The present chapter provides a brief summary
of the entire study and it also gives the interpretations of results ensuring from
the statistical analysis of the data presented in the previous chapter. The
implications along with suggestion for replicating the study or for investigating
of other closely related problems in other settings and with different samples
and tools are also presented.

5.2. NEED OF THE STUDY

Under the impact of Globalization Education has turned into a commodity that
can be exported or imported. As well as the growth of population and
competition made everybody to think education on the basis of economy. The
growing need for higher education exert pressure over the sector of education to
undergo an innovative change it’s a setup.

In this highly competitive world, Knowledge about this innovations is a

must, for students involve in the process of education. Because of this
significance researcher as being speeded of this area to make this innovation, a
qualitative one.

5.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Education is a complex concept and refers to both a process as well as a
product. Education as a product is viewed as the sum total of what is received
through learning that is acquisition of knowledge, skills, attitudes, interests and
values, transmission of culture, development of personality and liberation of
self-actualization. As a process, education involves the act of developing the
products in someone else or in our self. Education is very important, for
education determines interests, technology, productivity as well as vertical and
horizontal mobility of pupils. Jean Houstan (2003) stated that Education and
the process of educating is a total, integral, contextual situation which includes
students, teachers, parents, administration and environment.

The present study focuses on the students of IX and X standard to

investigate the metacognitive ability that determines their level of reading
materials or text books. The present study further more investigates towards the
dimensions of metacognitive strategies namely global reading strategies,
problem solving reading strategies and support reading strategies.

Hence in the present study the problem entitled A STUDY OF THE

METACOGNATIVE AWERNESS OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS in
Nilgiri District was taken up as an investigation in the field of education‘.

5.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

This study may help the investigator understand the actual mental health,
thinking process of every people. Strategy instruction can help all students
‘especially struggling ones; become more active readers and thinkers. As
Teachers strive to create the conditions under which their students can learn to
become thoughtful strategic readers, they will need to help their students
develop the ability to read academic materials efficiently and there by enhance
their overall academic achievement in school and college.

5. 5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

Objectives of the study are as follow
1. To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level among the
students of Secondary Schools.

2. To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level among the

Secondary School Students with respect to the demographic variables such
 as Gender, Standard, Group, Type of school, Parent‘s Education, Parent‘s
occupation and parent‘s annual income.
3. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on
Metacognition level between male and female students of Secondary
Schools.

4. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between IX standard and X standard students of
secondary schools.

5. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between science, Arts and vocational group students of
Secondary Schools.

6. To find out the significance difference on the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between students of Government, Aided and
private Secondary Schools.

7. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the students of Higher Secondary School
whose locality is Rural and Urban.

8. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level between the students of Secondary School whose
residence is house and hostel.

9. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on

Metacognition level students whose education is Illiterate, Primary and
Secondary Education.

10. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on
Metacognition level between the parents of Secondary School students
whose occupation is Government, Private and self-employed.
11. To find out the significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness on
Metacognition level between the parents of Secondary School students
whose annual income is less than 20,000 and above 20,000.

5.6 HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY:

Hypotheses of the study are as follow

1. To measure the level of Awareness towards Metacognition level
among the Students of Secondary Schools is average.

2. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between the Male and Female
students of Secondary Schools.

3. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between the IX standard and X
standard students of Secondary Schools.

4. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between students of Secondary
Schools.

5. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between Government, Aided and
Private Secondary School students.

6. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between Rural and Urban area
students of Secondary schools.

7. There is no significant difference towards the Mean values of

Awareness on Metacognition level between the students from House
and Hostel of Secondary Schools.
 8. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness
on Metacognition level between the Education level of the Parents
of Secondary School students who are Illiterate, or finished Primary
and Education.

9. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness

on Metacognition level between the Parents of Secondary School
students whose occupation is Government, Private and self-
employee.
10. There is no significant difference on the Mean values of Awareness
on Metacognition level between the Parents of Secondary School
students whose Annual income is below 20,000 and above 20,000.

5.7LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The study has the following limitations.
1. The study was limited to 6 schools in Nilgiri District only.
2. The study included Government, Government Aided and private schools.
3. The sample was limited to 200 Secondary school students.
4. The study is restricted to a few sub samples namely Gender, Standard,
Group, Type of school, Parents education, Parents occupation and
parents annual income.

5. Standardized test materials alone were used in this investigation.

5.8 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
1. It is found that the Awareness on Metacognition among the Secondary
School Students is high.

2. Gender of the Secondary school Students is having the similar level of

Awareness on Metacognition.

3. It is found that the IX and X standard students are having the same level of
Awareness on Metacognition.
 4. The Students those who are belonged to Science, Arts and Vocational
group Secondary School having medium and high level Awareness on
Metacognition.

5. The result shows that the students who are studying in Government,
Government aided and Private Secondary Schools are having the same
level of Awareness on Metacognition.

6. The students from urban area are having significant level of Awareness on
Metacognition than the Secondary School students from rural area in
support strategy at medium level.
7. Students those who are day scholars having significant level of Awareness
on Metacognition than the Secondary School Students from hostlers.

8. The higher Secondary School Students whose parental education is

illiterate, Primary and education are having high and medium level of
Awareness on Metacognition.

9. The Secondary School Students whose parental occupation is not

dependent on the Awareness on Metacognition. Because they are having
the same level of Awareness on Metacognition.

10.The students whose parental annual income is less than 20,000 are having
Significant level of Awareness on Metacognition than the Secondary
School Students Whose parental annual income is greater than 20,000 at
support Strategy at high level.

5.9 IMPLICATIONS

The suggested recommendations are as follows:

1. The Students those who are from rural area don‘t have enough facility to
learn more things. They just come to the school and study meaninglessly. To
avoid this situation, the Teachers should teach students how to learn on their
own throughout their lifetime. The more children learn about general
strategies for learning in specific contexts, the better they become at using
them across domains. The broader the range of strategies that children know
and can appreciate where they apply, the more precisely they can shape their
approaches to the demands of a particular circumstance.

2. The students from home are having more level of Awareness on

Metacognition because they folks know about what happens around in the
circumstances. They got information‘s and experiences from many places.

But the Hostel students don‘t have that facility. That‘s why the people don‘t
aware of the strategies are used. Students can be encouraged to develop a
sense of their own knowledge by asking questions such as ‗What do I
know?

What don‘t I know? What do I need to know?‘ Teachers can help students
to reflect on what they know and what they want to know as they embark on
the study of a new topic. Students can reflect again on what they know as
they conclude a lesson or unit. During the course of their work, teachers can
encourage a reflective instance towards learning that helps students assess
and direct their own emerging understandings. It is not only the teacher‘s
job, but also the student‘s responsibility to assess and direct their own
learning. By asking students to consider what they might to do learn
something they want to know and then providing a range of resources for
them to pursue it. Teachers can help students learn how to learn with greater
independence. Students can play an increasingly active role in monitoring
what they know and don‘t know and how they can find out what they need
to know to further their own learning.
3. The students from poor family, they are very eager to know new things.
They also think about their future and also work hard. They have aim to
reach the target,until they are working hard. So,the Parental income is not
influenced with Children‘s education.

4. However, teachers can promote awareness of strategies for thinking by

engaging their students in activities that require reflection. Students can
keep and share a ‗process log‘ where they write about the processes they
employ in writing, reading, or problem-solving generally. As students share
their entries, they gain an awareness of alternatives to their own processes,
and the teacher can direct them to consider specific strategies. Teachers, as
expert readers and writers, can also make their thinking strategies explicit by
‗thinking-aloud‟ with students as they read and write together. Group
work or discussion time can also regularly include a „process observer,‘
namely a participant who agrees to pay attention to how the interaction
progresses and to report to the group an analysis of its process. Activities
like these, that require students to make the sometimes- invisible work of
thinking visible and explicit, help all students to understand that as thinker,
they are in charge. More purposeful, flexible, and creative problem solving
is the result.

5.10 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

• The same study may be attempted on metacognitive abilities that
determines the level of creativity among students

• It would be interesting to replicate this study by selecting samples from

college students.

• The present study has been done in the schools of Nilgiri. Similar study
can be done comparing different districts in Tamilnadu
5.11 CONCLUSION
The present study which aimed at finding out the metacognitive awareness of
the reading strategies of IX and X students came up with the findings below:
Higher secondary School students use PROB, GLOB and SUP strategies
respectively. While the strategy used most is the problem solving strategies, the
least used one is the supporting strategies. It can be said that the students use the
problem solving strategies to solve the comprehension problems while reading a
text. So, the students use techniques as adjusting their reading speed to
understand better, re-reading at times, paying closer attention when they have
difficulty in understanding the text and guessing the unknown words. Other
strategies used by students while reading a text are global reading strategies.
They use these strategies usually in the pre-reading session to understand the
text better. Students use such techniques as determining the purpose for reading,
taking an overall view of the text, seeing how the text is organized, using visuals
like pictures, figures or tables and paying attention to the words or sentences in
bold face and italic. The strategies that students use less are the supporting
reading strategies, which are used while reading to better understand and
increase remembering. While reading, students use the techniques like taking
notes, underlining the important points, using a dictionary, reading aloud,
paraphrasing, and asking questions and answering them.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Armstrong, Anne. Marie (1993) cognitive style differences in testing
situations. Jn: Educational Measurement: issues and practice; V12 N3
P17-22 fall 1993.

• Best, J.W. (1983). Research in Education. Seventh Edition. New Delhi:

Prentice – Hall of India.

• Castle E.B. (1969). The Human Factor in Education. New Delhi: Orient
Longmans.

• Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education.

London: Croom Helm Publishers.

• Crow & Crow (1963). Educational psychology. New York: American

Book X.

• Cassady, J.C., & Johnson, R.E. Cognitive test anxiety and academic
performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology.

• Everson, Howard. T and others (1992) explore the relationship of Test

Anxiety and Metacognition on Reading Test performance: A cognitive
Analysis.

• Flavell, J.H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.),

Children's oral communication skills (pp.35 - 60). NewYork: Academic
Press.

• Garret, Henry, E. (1969). Statistics in Psychology & Education. Fifth

Edition, Vakils feffr and simmns Limited.

• George, E.J. (1968). ―Needs and Problems of High School and College
students‖. Department of Psychology. Ku.V. 3 rd Survey of Educational
Research.
• Horak, Virginia. M (1990) student’s cognitive styles and their use of
problem solving Heuristics and metacognitive processes.
• Keefe, James. W (1991) Learning style: Cognitive and thinking skills.
Instructional leadership series; National Association of secondary school
principals, Reston Va.

• Maqsud, M. (1997). Effects of metacognitive skills and nonverbal ability

on academic achievement of high school pupils. Educational Psychology,
17, 387-397.

• Messic-Samuel (1984) The Nature of cognitive styles; problems and

promise in educational practice. Educational Psychology 59-74.

• Mulary. (1971). ―A study of Needs and Problems of Adolescent‖.

University training college. Nagpur, U.G.C. Financed. A survey of
Research in Education.

• Pinard, A. (1991). Metaconsciousness and Metacognition. Allocution

addressed to the Canadian Psychological Association in Calgary, Alberta.

• Singha H.S. (1991). School education in India (contemporary issues

trends)) sterling publisher‘s private limited.

• Seeratan, K. L. (2000). Motivation for Success: A new probe for

investigating the Cognitive, Affective and Metacognitive profiles of
individuals with Learning Disabilities. Thesis submitted in fulfillment of
Master Degree, University of Toronto.

• Swanson, H. L. (1990). Influence of metacognitive knowledge and

aptitude on problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology 82: 306
– 314.

• Tripathi Rekha. H. (1986). ― A study of the pupils of secondary and

higher secondary schools‖, Fourth survey of research in Education, Vol
• Vadhan, V., & Stander, P. (1994). Metacognitive ability and test
performance among college students. Journal of Psychology, 128,
307309.

Web Sites
 Learning to learn Metacognition
• http://snow.utoronto.ca/Learn2/mod2/index.html
• http://www.nvo.com/ecnewletter/metacognitionhots/
• www.google scholars.com
• www.psychology journals.com