The document summarizes a study on improving Indonesian EFL students' reading and writing skills through direct instruction of cognitive and metacognitive strategies. It begins with background on literacy rates and education levels in Indonesia. It then discusses issues with students' current approach to reading and writing in English. The study aims to investigate the effects of explicit strategy instruction on students' reading, writing, and ability to integrate information from reading to writing. A quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-tests will be used to compare outcomes between a control group and an experimental group receiving strategy instruction. Limitations are addressed and data collection and analysis methods involving questionnaires, tests, interviews and checklists are outlined.

1. Reading into Writing Strategies
Construction: a Quasi-Experimental
Design
Imelda Hermilinda Abas
(93847)

2. Why Literacy?
• In the context of EFL, literacy encompasses ways of knowing
particular content, languages and practices (Johns, 1997).
• It also refers to a variety of previous experiences, not only
with texts, but with parents, teachers, and others who are
literate (Gee, 1991; Heath, 1986).
• In sum, academic literacy (reading and writing) among the EFL
learners is chose as the central of this study because it reflects
the complexity and evolving nature of teaching and learning
process of English as foreign language.

3. Background of the Study
10-14 years old
19%
15-44 years old
26%
45 years above
55%
Illiteracy
Source: Badan Pusat Statistik, 2010

4. 98.02
86.24
56.01
13.77
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
7-8 years old 13-15 years
old
16-18 years
old
19-24 years
old
Children with Formal Education
7-8 years old
13-15 years old
16-18 years old
19-24 years old
Source: Badan Pusat Statistik, 2010

5. • In the typical secondary school classroom teachers mostly
dominate talk. Teachers urge the students to listen, to obey
and to memorise things (Buchori, 2001).
• Questioning is seen “to challenge teacher’s authority, and to
demonstrate one’s arrogance or ignorance – to risk the
possibility of punishment or personal humiliation (loss of
social face)” (Lewis, 1997, p.13).
• English is learnt as a foreign language; and though it is one of
the compulsory subjects in secondary and tertiary education
• Moreover, “English is seldom used in the classroom as
teachers tend to use Bahasa Indonesia to carry out their
English lessons in the classroom.

6. Problem Statement
• In case of EFL reading and writing skills as refer to the
academic literacy, Indonesian students, both who study at
abroad and domestic universities, are still having difficulties in
mastering these skills (Novera, 2004).
• Research has also revealed that many ESL/ EFL students are
not highly proficient in English reading and writing
(Tapinta, 2006).
• In mastering academic literacy such as reading and
writing, cognitive skills (learning, memory and thoughts) are
crucial, because the students will have the ability to interpret
content and thus effectively interpret the messages intended
by the authors (Tapinta, 2006; Hartman, 2001; Schraw, 2001).

7. Problem Statement
• In the case of Indonesian EFL students, they learn to read and write in
English mainly through an instructional approach which is teacher-
directed, with an emphasis placed on the products of students’
performances.
• In the tertiary level of education, the majority of Indonesian students have
a few opportunities to practice English writing beyond the paragraph level.
• On the other hand, students are not trained to think about how they can
develop their cognitive strategies to enhance different writing processes.
• So far, however, there has been little discussion about the relationship
between reading and writing, specifically in reading into writing strategies
construction for Indonesian undergraduate students to apply in their
writings.
• there is still few research found that surveyed on whether or not the
students know and applied their cognitive and meta-cognitive knowledge
in their writing.

8. To investigate the differences
of reading and writing strategy
used at the pre and post test.
To determine the relationship
between reading and writing.
To analyse the differences in
reading-to-write
construction at the pre and
post treatment.
To evaluate the effects of the
treatment to the students’
reading and writing ability.
What are cognitive and metacognitive
strategies used by the students in
reading and writing pre-test and post-
test?
Is there significant relationship between
reading and writing?
Having been exposed to cognitive
and metacognitive strategies, is
there a significant difference in
reading into writing strategies used
at the pre and post treatment?
Research Objectives and Questions
What are the effects of the
treatment to the students’ reading
and writing ability?

9. Hypothesis
• Knowledge of and expertise which involved learning strategies
in reading and writing help readers and writers become more
proficient (Tapinta, 2006)
• Teaching students to know how, when, and why they can use
strategies will enhance their learning to read and write
metacognitively (Carell, 2001; Sternberg, 2001).
• Teaching students to read and write metacognitively
promotes their potential of becoming expert readers and
writers (e.g., Block, 1992; Brown, Palincsar, &
Armbruster, 1994; El- Hindi, 1997; Pintrich, 2002;
Stolarek, 1994; Williams & Colomb, 1993)

10. Why Quasi Experimental?
• According to Gay, Mills and Airasian (2009: 240), experimental
research is the only type of research that can test hypotheses
to establish cause-effect relations. It represents the strongest
chain of reasoning about the links between variables.
• In experimental research, the researcher manipulates at least
one variable, controls other relevant variables, and observes
the effect on one or more dependent variables. The
researcher determines “who gets what” (p. 240); that is the
researcher has control over the selection and assignment of
groups to treatment.

11. Why Quasi Experimental?
• Quasi experiment employs intact groups as the sample and non-
equivalent control group design. This means that the experimental design
of this study will use the pre-test and post-test control, where two
treatment groups will be pretested, participated in a treatment, and post
tested.
• The research design can be seen in the following:
O – X1 – O1
O – X2 – O2
• Control group
O = Pre-test ; X1 = writing treatment; O1 = Post-test
• Experimental group
O = Pre-test ; X1 = reading and writing treatment; O1 = Post-test

12. Limitation of the Study
Possible Threats Action
History
Provide the same activities for both experimental
groups, except for the treatment, and allocate
sufficient time (i.e. not too long, not too short) for
conducting the experiment (Creswell, 2009; Gay, Mills
and Airasian, 2009).
Maturation
Choose participants from the same grade level and age
(Creswell, 2009).
Mortality
Collect demographic information on the participants
before the experiment start and then determining if
the makeup of the groups has changed at the end of
the study (Gay, Mills, and Airasian, 2009: 245; Creswell,
2009).

13. Limitation of the Study
Possible Threats Action
Testing
schedule the time period span between the pre-test and post-
test within a month period (Creswell, 2009; Gay, Mills and
Airasian, 2009).
Instrumentation
Creswell (2008) suggests standardizing procedures so that the
researcher uses the same observational scales or instrument
throughout the experiment.
Regression
Select participant with average or moderate score in the pre-
test (Creswell, 2009; Gay, Mills and Airasian, 2009).
Participants
Select intact classes with big number of students then select
the participants with the average or moderate scores to join
the treatment (Creswell, 2009; Gay, Mills and Airasian, 2009).

14. Significance and Scope of Study
• EFL students’ knowledge/ awareness of strategy use and their abilities in
applying such strategies in reading and writing has not been discussed
extensively in the literature. This better understanding may help inform
classroom teachers and educators about what pedagogical considerations
needs to be taken when developing or implementing instruction to promote
students’ strategic knowledge and expertise in English reading and writing.
• Also, the findings and discussions of the theoretical and practical implications
from this study should contribute to the body of research knowledge in the
field of English literacy development for EFL learners.
• This research covers the reading into writing strategies construction in
increasing the undergraduate students’ writing skills.
• This study is not meant to generalize the whole Indonesian students since it
only focuses on the undergraduate university students of Hasanuddin
University.
• Finally, this study also limits its focus on reading strategies, writing strategies
and the relationship between all the variables.

15. Instruments
The questionnaire use in this study is a
five-point Likert scale questionnaire
(Never/ Seldom/ Sometimes/ Usually/ and
Always). There are 27 items (out of which
14 items were metacognitive and 13 items
were cognitive in nature) in this study
adapted from Maghsudi and Talebi (2009
The test will be taken from TOEFL
complete practice test one of the Reading
Comprehension Section of the TOEFL
Complete Practice Test (Mahnke &
Duffy, 1996) will be used as a pre-test and
post-test, to measure of the students’
English reading proficiency.
The interview questions adapted from
Tapinta, Pataraporn (2006); following
Burg’s guideline of the semi-structured
interview (2004) and these questions will
be tried out in pilot studies and refined for
this study
The Checklists of Reading and Writing
Strategies (adapted from
Tapinta, Pataraporn, 2006) is to raise the
students’ awareness of strategy use.

16. Data Collection
Administer the pre-
test
Selecting participants
with the average or
moderate scores in
the pre-test
Introducing
experimental
treatment to
experimental group
and control group
Monitoring the
process closely so
that threat of internal
validity are minimized
Administer the post-
test (the outcome)
Organize and Analyze
the data

17. Data Analysis
Research Question Data Resource Data Analysis
What and how are cognitive and
metacognitive strategies used by the
students in reading and writing pre-
test?
Pre-test and post-test
Reading strategy
questionnaire
Checklist writing strategy
t-test
ANCOVA analysis
Is there significant relationship
between reading and writing?
Pre-test and post-test
Interview
Descriptive statistic for
reading and writing
measure
Having been exposed to cognitive and
metacognitive strategies, is there a
significant difference in reading into
writing strategies used at the pre and
post treatment?
Reading strategy checklist
and writing strategy
checklist
Interview
Qualitative analysis
What are the effects of the treatment
to the students’ reading and writing
ability?
Interview Qualitative analysis