ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643

Volume 9, Issue 1, December 2020 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

METACOGNITIVE LEARNING STRATEGIES

IN ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING SKILLS
Erwin Oktoma
Language Education Study Program, State University of Jakarta
Email: [email protected]

Zainal Rafli
Language Education Study Program, State University of Jakarta
Email: [email protected]

Aceng Rahmat
Language Education Study Program, State University of Jakarta
Email: [email protected]

APA Citation: Oktoma E., Rafli, Z., & Rahmat, A. (2020). Metacognitive learning strategies in argumentative
writing skills. English Review: Journal of English Education, 9(1), 183-192.
https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v9i1.3795

Received: 28-06-2020 Accepted: 29-09-2020 Published:11-12-2020

Abstract: This study aims to determine the effect of metacognitive learning strategies on students'
argumentative writing skills. This research was conducted on third semester students of the English education
study program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Kuningan. A quantitative approach was
chosen with an experimental data collection technique tests as a used method, namely: (1) Test of argumentative
writing skills. This study examines the effect of metacognitive learning strategies on students' argumentative
writing skills. The learning strategies used are metacognitive learning strategies (experimental class) and control
class concept map learning strategies. The findings indicate that metacognitive learning strategies are effective in
teaching students' argumentative writing in English. Regarding the results of this study, the application of
different learning strategies is needed in students' argumentative writing learning. Based on the results and
conclusions above, it turns out that metacognitive learning strategies have a significant effect on students'
argumentative writing skills in English. Thus, this research provides a beneficial implication in planning and
developing learning strategies which will be used in improving students' argumentative writing skills in English,
especially with regard to the application of appropriate learning strategies. The argumentative writing skills of
students who were given metacognitive learning strategies were better than those who were given concept map
learning strategies instead. In this case, the role of the lecturer is very important so that to improve students'
argumentative writing skills, metacognitive strategies are more effectively applied in class.
Keywords: metacognitive learning strategies; thinking ability; argumentative writing

INTRODUCTION and expression of the mind is prioritized rather

Writing is seen as a means of a written than the stylized and composed of the writing.
communicating messages or information between In a writing, someone often needs arguments
the writer and the reader. In addition, writing is to express their ideas. One of the texts which
also a diction practice to convey the message in a requires arguments is argumentative text. In
more comprehensible manner for readers. Writing argumentative writing, which contains the
means producing a series of sentences which are author's opinion in order to influence others, must
arranged in an orderly manner and are interrelated have a strong foundation in describing the facts.
in a certain way so that a series of arranged McCrimmon (1984) writes that persuasion or
sentences becomes a text; which is not an easy argumentation is verbal a communication which
and spontaneous activity. The implementation of seeks to make changes in making decisions
learning to write according to Wage and Dantes voluntarily so that audience accept a new belief
(2015), needs to pay attention to the following which was not previously believed. The form of
matters: (1) writing is a process of two parties verbal communication used is through written
namely students as writers and teachers as readers communication to convince the reader to switch
and guides, (2) the experience must depart from their stance voluntarily in making decisions in
the students themselves, so that ideas can be accordance with the expectations of the author.
developed easily, (3) writing can be improved if This opinion is supported by Mcdonald (1996)
the exercises run continuously, (4) the meaning who uses the term rhetoric or rhetoric as another

183
Erwin Oktoma, Zainal Rafli, & Aceng Rahmat
Metacognitive learning strategies in argumentative writing skills

term for argumentative, which is the use of scientists from other fields to also study it. Now,
persuasive language to influence readers or besides being a study in the field of cognitive
listeners. In other words, argumentative writing is psychology, metacognition has become a study in
the use of persuasive language or an invitation to the fields of language, mental disorders,
influence the reader to make a change in thinking. mathematics and education. This development
These changes may be as simple as passing on seems to be supported by a belief that
one's beliefs to others or further influencing metacognition as part of cognition is likely to
actions such as getting to choose person A over experience changes in terms of capacities,
person B, asking to quit smoking, or to buy a strategies and forms of knowledge. Research in
product. Argumentative writing is very important the development of metacognition began in the
for students to master considering that this type of 1970s Brown, John Flavell, and their colleagues.
writing is widely used in various aspects of life, In the beginning, metacognition was broadly
for example: in writing scientific papers, religious defined as knowledge or cognitive activity which
lectures, advertorials, for appeals, to campaign for makes cognitive activity its cognitive object, or
someone or a program, and others. which regulates cognitive activity itself
The writer must also be able to criticize (Schneider, 2008). Larkin (2010) says that
something wisely and acceptable to reader's "metacognition" comes from "meta" and
thoughts. In other words, the opinion expressed "cognition". From his understanding, "meta"
by the author must be reasonable and genuine. refers to a change in position, a thing which is
Argumentative writing is not only concerned with moving outward or towards a higher level while
clarity but requires conviction by means of "Cognition" refers to our ability or ability to know
existing facts, indirectly, through the writer's or think. Thus, "metacognition" describes a higher
conviction, it can influence the author in uttering thought process, something which is reflective
logical statements and the writer will be able to and constantly moves beyond the normal level of
account for his writing properly. Alwasilah (2008) thinking in reflecting on the thinking itself.
explains that there are several components of an Besides that Metacognition is our knowledge of
argument, as follows: The first component is an cognitive processes and how to use them
introduction or an exordium (exhortation) to the optimally to achieve learning goals (Pitenoee &
audience. Introduction acts to attract the reader's Ardestani, 2017). To illustrate this concept
interest or attention, and introduce the subject of Panahandeh and Espandiari (2014) describe a
discussion. Second is thesis, a thesis is a study in which preschool and elementary children
statement regarding the position (attitude) towards learn a set of items until they feel they can
an issue. The reader is led by the author to agree remember them perfectly. Older children, once
with the thesis or proposition (pro-position, i.e. they have indicated they are ready, exhibit
side with a position) the evidence presented must "perfect memories," whereas younger children
support a thesis. Third, conclusion, the conclusion usually do not. These results suggest that
means nothing but to strengthen the thesis preschoolers are very limited in their knowledge
previously described. and cognition of cognitive phenomena or in their
In learning to write arguments for the use of metacognitive behaviour.
learning strategies, basically, it is a suitable way It is clear that this definition refers to people's
of doing assignments or more generally in knowledge of information processing skills and
achieving goals (Kirby, 1984). Meanwhile, knowledge of the nature of cognitive tasks, and of
according to Sanjaya (2006), to be able to achieve coping strategies for those tasks. This concept
the results of learning to write English which is also includes executive skills related to
the goal of learning to write English, a strategy is monitoring and self-regulating their own
needed which is in accordance with the nature of cognitive activities.
the writing lesson itself. According to Sanjaya, Flavel in Priscilla & Ruan (2008) suggests
the learning strategy is a way used by the teacher three aspects of metacognition, namely
to achieve learning objectives which depend on metacognition knowledge, metacognition
the approach or method used. experience, and metacognition skills which are a
Metacognition or metacognitive is a term strategy in controlling cognition. Metacognitive
coined by Flavel and Miller (1993) in 1976 knowledge is characterized by combinations of
starting from its limitations as a study of the information around three self-knowledge
psychology of cognition, since the 1970s variables. Tasks and strategies which will be
metacognition has attracted the attention of effective in achieving the objectives of the tasks

184
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 9, Issue 1, December 2020 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

to be assigned. Metacognitive experiences are Experience of Metacognition; refers to what a

metacognitive items which have entered the realm person believes about his own state of mind, for
of consciousness, and can include evaluations example the belief which he is intelligent,
where someone completes a task, or perhaps a knowledgeable, understands faster by hearing
sense of confusion where someone may or may than by reading, has begun to forget often, is slow
not act. to think, and so on. (3) Objectives (Tasks); with
Metacognitive knowledge is differentiated regard to a person's knowledge of the nature of a
from metacognitive activity. Metacognitive particular task, for example the awareness that
knowledge involves monitoring and reflecting on this job is more difficult than previous jobs, such
one's thoughts in the present moment. This work demands a lot of time, and this concept is
includes factual knowledge, such as knowledge of not well mastered, and so on, and (4) action
tasks, goals or self and strategic knowledge, such (strategy), relating to someone's knowledge of
as how and when to use specific procedures to ways to carry out an activity, for example, this
solve problems. Metacognition activity, on the way is more appropriate than others for purposes
other hand, occurs in students consciously and contexts like this, the best way to memorize a
adjusting and managing their thinking strategies lot of material is to focus on the main idea,
when solving problems in thinking about a goal associate with things already known, and repeated
(Santrock, 2004). it in his own language many times. Furthermore,
Baird in Cubucku (2008) defines he said metacognition consists of metacognitive
metacognition as knowledge, awareness, and self- knowledge and metacognitive experience and
control. Thus, the development of metacognition regulation.
can be described as a development of one's Thus, it can be stated that metacognition is (1)
metacognitive abilities, namely leading to greater the process of monitoring and directing one's own
knowledge, awareness and control of one's thoughts so that something is achieved more
learning. Larkin (2010) says that "metacognition" optimally, (2) a person's knowledge of his own
comes from "Meta" and "Cognition." According state or thought process, and (3) a person's ability
to him, "Meta" refers to a change in position, to monitor and direct his own thoughts to achieve
something which is moving outward or towards a something expected.
higher layer. "Cognition" refers to our ability or
ability to know or think. Thus "Metacognition" Models and theory of metacognition
describes a higher thought process, something On the other hand, researchers such as Pintrich,
which is reflective and continues to move beyond Wolters and Bexters in Cubucku (2008) argue that
the normal level of thinking in reflecting on the there are three main components of metacognition,
thinking itself. namely metacognition knowledge, metacognition
Cazden defined metalinguistic consciousness monitoring and regulation and self-control. First,
like the metamemory definition Flavell uses. Both metacognitive knowledge consists of cognitive
use the word meta which refers to reflective learning strategies which learners use to regulate
awareness of cognitive processes, while the knowledge acquisition process. This includes
Butterfield, Wambold and Belmont place an elaboration strategies such as building
important emphasis on the control of a cognitive relationships with pre-existing knowledge, or
process called the executive process. This process memory strategies such as note-taking. Both
has actually become part of the definition of metacognition monitoring consist of
metacognition given. Flavell and Bown. metacognition control strategies. What is
Cavanaugh and Perlmutter argue that the content important here are activities such as planning and
of memory knowledge is called metamemory. monitoring learning activities, evaluating the
Baker and Anderson in Lawson more generally impact of learning and adjusting to various task
state that metacognition is knowledge and control demands, and (unexpected) difficulties.
of cognitive processes it has (Lawson, 1984). Metacognitive strategies involve thinking about
Therefore, people who have metacognition the learning process, planning learning,
strategies are those who have knowledge and monitoring and learning assignments and how to
control of thinking and learning activities. evaluate what has been learned (Panahandeha &
According to Hacker (2017), a person's ability to Esfandiari, 2014).
control various cognitive activities is carried out Besides the two models above, the third group
through action and interaction between four of strategies is aimed at management, resources
phenomena: (1) Metacognition Knowledge; (2) and self-management. These strategies are

185
Erwin Oktoma, Zainal Rafli, & Aceng Rahmat
Metacognitive learning strategies in argumentative writing skills

concerned with controlling the general conditions development (Schneider, 2008). Metacognitive
associated with learning, such as time experiences involve metacognition strategies or
management and learning environment metacognition regulation. Metacognique strategy
management. The model proposed by Pintrich in is a sequential process used to control cognitive
Cubucku (2008, p.2) states that "students develop activity and ensure that cognitive goals have been
perceptions of task demands, seen in achieved (Schneider, 2008).
metacognition monitoring, selecting and This process consists of planning and
executing metacognition strategies which are monitoring cognitive activities and evaluating the
appropriate for task demands, and evaluating results of these activities. Planning activities such
performance tasks which illustrate the as setting goals and analyzing assignments help
effectiveness of cognitive strategies." Another activate relevant knowledge to make it easier to
cognitive model proposed by Winne and Hadwin organize and understand lesson material.
has four basic stages, task definition, goal setting Monitoring activation includes a person's
and planning, creation, and adjustment. This attention when he is reading, and making
model states that students generate a perception of questions or self-examination. This activity helps
what is the task and the availability of resources, a students understand the material and integrate it
plan shows the task, plays learning strategies, and with initial knowledge. Regulatory activities
makes changes to their cognitive structure based include adjustment and improvement of students'
on performance perceptions. Pintrich synthesized cognitive activities. This activity helps increase
various expert opinions into a general framework performance by monitoring and correcting his
which includes (a) initial thinking, planning and behavior when he completes assignments. For
activation, (b) monitoring, (c) control, and (d) example, after reading a paragraph in a text,
reaction and reflection. students ask themselves about the concepts
Schneider (2008) elaborated on the theoretical discussed in that paragraph. The cognitive goal is
model proposed by Flavell, which they called the to make sense of the text. Asking oneself is a
Good Information processing model. According metacognitive strategy. If he finds that he cannot
to this model, sophisticated metacognition is answer his own questions, or that he cannot
closely related to the use of learner strategies, understand the material under discussion, he then
motivational orientation, general knowledge of determines what needs to do to ensure that he
the world, and the use of efficient automated achieves that cognitive goal. He may decide to
learning procedures. All of these components are repeat or reread the paragraph in order to be able
assumed to interact. For example, knowledge of to answer his own question.
specific strategies influences the application of In the information-processing model, this
adequate metacognitive strategies, which in turn experience or metacognition management is
influences knowledge. As these strategies are called executive process or executive control.
implemented, they are monitored and evaluated, Executive control involves a process of
leading to expansion and improvement of specific metacognition. This process activates and directs
strategy knowledge. the flow of information during learning. This
More recently conceptualization has added to strategy directs students' choices towards the
its component self-regulating skills. Originally, cognitive strategies they use to determine what to
the concept of metacognition was developed in do during the problem-solving process. What it
the context of development research, but is now does depends on the expectations or goals and on
widely used in different fields of psychology, the strategies used to achieve the goals. For
including motivational research and clinical example, a student studying for a test will use a
psychology and education. Recent developments different strategy if he or she is preparing to teach
have also included cognitive neuroscience models a skill. According to Klowe in Hacker (2017), the
of metacognition, the popularity of which is process of monitoring selection and application as
because metacognition is essential for everyday well as the influence of the process and regulation
conceptual offerings and for those who value of problem-solving activities constitutes
scientific thinking, as well as for social metacognitive procedural knowledge. The
interactions. A recent research paradigm which is executive process involves both monitoring and
quite influential which aims to understand regulating thought processes, because it is related
metacognitive processes within its developmental to Flavell's metacognition strategy and
dimension, tries to link the 'Minda Theory' (TM) metacognition skills. The executive monitoring
of children with their continuous metacognition

186
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 9, Issue 1, December 2020 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

process is a process which is directed at obtaining indicators of evaluation of the achievement of

information about a person's thought processes. learning objectives, evaluation of the time used,
This process involves Helping Someone's evaluation of the relevance of initial knowledge
Decision (1) identifying the task, (2) monitoring with new subject matter, and evaluation of
the progress of the work, (3) evaluating this cognitive strategies which have been used.
progress, and (4) predicting the obtained outcome. Oxpord (1990) classifies learning strategies
The executive management process is a process into two major groups, namely direct strategies
which is directed at the process of organizing and indirect strategies. Direct strategies can also
one's thinking. This process helps (1) allocate be divided into three groups of strategies, namely
available resources to do tasks, (2) determine the memory strategies, cognitive strategies, and
steps for completing the task, and (3) determine compensation strategies. Furthermore, indirect
the intensity, or (4) the speed in completing the strategies are divided into three groups of
task. Livingstone (2002) analogizes this strategies, namely metacognitive strategies,
difference with differences in theory and practice. affective strategies, and social strategies.
Knowledge is relatively consistent within a Metacognition strategy is one group of
person while unstable settings, independent of age, strategies which are classified into indirect
can change depending on the situation. You strategies. It is said that the strategy is indirect
exhibit self-regulatory behavior just in certain because these strategies support and regulate the
situations, and the child exhibits self-regulatory learning process, which indirectly involves the
behavior which adults do not. Anxiety, fears and language being learned. Metacognition strategies
interests and self-concepts such as self-esteem can allow learners to control their own cognition,
influence regulations. The regulatory process namely coordinating learning processes using
tends to be more unconscious. The ability to bring functions such as centering, arranging, planning
automated skills to consciousness is a and evaluating (Oxpord, (1990). Metacognition
characteristic of high metacognition and also includes three sets of strategies, (a) centering
intelligence. By developing self-awareness, your learning, (b) arranging and planning your
means developing intelligence. learning and (c) evaluating your learning. It also
Halter (2017) classifies metacognition strategy consists of several more concrete strategies or the
indicators into three groups. First, awareness strategies obtained are disclosed in detail. The
includes the awareness of identifying what is following table describes the strategies contained
already known, determining learning objectives, in each strategy set (Oxpord, 1990).
considering learning aids, considering the form of Another metacognition strategy model is a
tasks, determining how to evaluate how to model developed by Anna et al. (1999). They
evaluate learning achievement, considering the develop a metacognition model for strategic
level of motivation, and determining the level of learning. This model is based on extensive studies
anxiety. Second, planning, includes activities to of learning strategies whose data relates to the
estimate the time needed to complete a task, effective use of strategies in a second or foreign
planning study time into a schedule, making language. Learning strategies are selected for
checklists about the activities which need to be inclusion in the model based on their usefulness
done, organizing the material and taking the steps and applicability in a wide variety of learning
needed to learn using cognitive strategies. Third, tasks thus learners can use these strategies in the
monitoring and reflection, includes activities to four language skills, such as listening, speaking,
supervise the learning process, monitor learning reading, and writing. The model developed by
with own questions, provide feedback and Anna et al consists of four metacognition
maintain concentration and motivation. processes, namely planning, monitoring, problem
In more detail, the indicators for metacognition solving and evaluation. The four metacognition
strategies are classified as follows. (1) self- strategies are not necessarily sequential but can be
planning, has indicators of learning objectives, used as needed, depending on the needs of the
relevant initial knowledge, and cognitive task and the interactions between tasks. The
strategies to be used. (2) self-monitoring, has image below illustrates the relationship between
indicators on monitoring the achievement of the four metacognition processes proposed by
learning objectives, monitoring time used, Anna et al (1999).
monitoring hypotheses of initial knowledge Producing a good argumentative writing is not
material with new subject matter, and monitoring easy since a writer requires a complex process
cognitive strategies used. (3) self-evaluation, has and needs continuous practice so that the writer

187
Erwin Oktoma, Zainal Rafli, & Aceng Rahmat
Metacognitive learning strategies in argumentative writing skills

will be trained in expanding the idea writing skills using concept map learning
systematically and logically. From the results of strategies.
observations, the main problem in this study was In this design, the total sample size is 52
that the students of the English Language people, consisting of 26 people as the
Education Study Program, FKIP, Universitas experimental group (learning with metacognition
Kuningan were less able to develop strategies) and 26 people as the control group
argumentative writing seen from the results of the (learning with the concept map strategy).
argumentative writing skills test at the time of There are two kinds of instruments used for
taking the initial research data. This problem data collection in this study, namely: (1) Test of
arises since; first, it is difficult for lecturers to
argumentative writing skills. In order to measure
determine the right learning strategy in the the research variables quantitatively, the research
learning process of argumentative writing skills, variables of argumentative writing skills are
as a result, the learning process is not well defined as follows. a) Conceptual Definition,
organized. Second, the learning process does not Argumentative writing skills. In this study is the
lead to the achievement of the final goal, which is,
ability to carry out verbal communication as a
students are less able to produce written products process of developing and communicating ideas,
(argumentative). Third, the learning process in experiences, and ideas effectively which involves
argumentative writing skills seems to prioritize transferring them into written language so that
cognitive aspects only. Fourth, student responses readers voluntarily accept a new belief which is
in learning argumentative writing skills are very not believed beforehand that writing must be
low since the first place they already think that supported by various definitions. Examples of
learning to write is very difficult so that students
category classifications and applying the law of
are unmotivated and less active when the learning causality by following the rules of good
process takes place. argumentative writing including problem
Based on this description, it can be concluded explanations, thesis statements, rebuttals to
that the development of argumentative writing opposing arguments, composing their own
can be carried out and improved through learning arguments, and skills to compose words or
strategies including metacognition strategies sentences which become a text. The expected
because students must plan, then monitor and result is that the arguments are well structured,
control their thoughts and can express and group comprehensible with an excellent diction,
ideas to be written logically and hierarchically. structure sentences with good grammatical and
The problems studied in this study relate to structure using spelling, punctuation, and capital
argumentative writing skills in English (variable letters correctly. b) Operational definition,
Y) and learning strategies using metacognition operationally argumentative writing skills are the
learning strategies as experimental variables, scores of the results of students' argumentative
(variable X1). writing skills tests by following the rules of
argumentative writing with criteria for content,
METHOD organization, vocabulary, language use and
This study aims to determine empirically the mechanics.
effect of metacognition strategies on students'
argumentative writing skills. This research was RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
conducted at the Faculty of Teacher Training and The description of the research data is intended to
Education, Universitas Kuningan, English see in general the depiction of the argumentative
Education Study Program semester III, The writing skills of students who are the subjects of
research lasted for 3 months, namely from the study. The students' argumentative writing
February to April 2018-2019 academic year. The skills are divided into three groups based on
method used in this research is experimental learning strategies (metacognition strategy and
research. In this research design, the sample is concept map strategy): 1) argumentative writing
divided into two groups, namely the experimental skills of students who learn with metacognitive
group and the control group. The first group is an learning strategies (A1). 2) argumentative writing
experimental group consisting of students who are skills of students who learn the concept map
treated with metacognition learning strategies. learning strategy (A2). Students' argumentative
The second group is a control group consisting of writing skills are given Metacognitive Learning
students who are treated with argumentative Strategies (A1). The data on students'
argumentative writing skills for the group

188
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 9, Issue 1, December 2020 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

learning with metacognitive strategies, obtained a With these data, the frequency distribution
maximum score of 91, a minimum score of 68, an table of students' argumentative writing skills for
average score of 79.15 standard deviation of 8.37. students learning with metacognitive learning
From the maximum and minimum scores, the strategies is as in the table below.
score ranges from 23 class intervals and the
number of classes 6.

Table 1. Frequency distribution of scores for argumentative writing skills for students who learn with
metacognitive strategies (A1)
No. Score Absolute Frequency Cumulative Relative
Frequency Frequency (%)
1 68 – 71 7 7 26.9
2 72 – 75 5 12 19.2
3 76 – 79 1 13 3.8
4 80 – 83 1 14 3.8
5 84 – 87 7 21 26.9
6 88 – 91 5 26 19.2
Total 26 100

Figure 1. The histogram of argumentative writing skills scores for students who learn metacognitive strategies
(A1)

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
67,5 71,5 75,5 79,5 83,5 87,5 91,5

Argumentative Writing Skills for Students the maximum and minimum scores, the score
Who Learn with Concept Map Strategies (A2) range is 20, the class 4 interval and the number of
Data on the argumentative writing skills of classes 6.
students learning with concept map strategies, Based on the data above, a frequency
obtained a maximum score of 88, a minimum distribution table for students' Argumentative
score of 68, an average count of 77.46 standard Writing Skills is made for those who provide
deviation of 6.56 and a variance of 42.98. From concept map strategies, as in the table below.

189
Erwin Oktoma, Zainal Rafli, & Aceng Rahmat
Metacognitive learning strategies in argumentative writing skills

Table 2. Frequency distribution of argumentative writing skills scores of students who learn with the concept
map strategy (A2)
No. Score Absolute Frequency Cumulative Relative
Frequency Frequency (%)
1 68 – 71 7 7 26.9
2 72 – 75 5 12 19.2
3 76 – 79 1 13 3.8
4 80 – 83 1 14 3.8
5 84 – 87 7 21 26.9
6 88 – 91 5 26 19.2
Total 26 100

Figure 2. The histogram for the score of argumentative writing skills for students who learn with the concept
map strategy (A2)

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
67,5 71,5 75,5 79,5 83,5 87,5 91,5

Table 3. Summary of scores for argumentative writing skills in English of all data groups in this study.
Data Group Statistics
N Lowest Score Highest Mean Standard
Sample Score Deviation
Metacognitive 26 68 91 79.15 8.37
Strategy (A1)
Concept Map 26 68 88 77.46 6.56
Strategy (A2)

A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and homogeneous. Therefore, before testing the
was used in this study. Analysis is allowed if the hypothesis, it is necessary to test the normality
student's argumentative writing skills data comes and homogeneity requirements.
from a population whish is normally distributed

Table 4. Results of the summary of normality test for argumentative writing skills
Sample Group N Lo L1 (α = 0.05) Summary
1. A1 26 0.152 0.174 Normal
2. A2 26 0.173 0.174 Normal

In this study the variant homogeneity test was argumentative writing skills in groups learning
carried out on: (1) two groups, students with concept map strategies (A2),
'argumentative writing skills in the group learning
with metacognitive strategies (A1) and students'

190
ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643
Volume 9, Issue 1, December 2020 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE

Test of variants of two treatment groups (A1 and The discussion of the results of the study was
A2) carried out based on the data descriptions of
The homogeneity test of the variance of the two students' argumentative writing skills and the
treatment groups in this study was carried out by results of hypothesis testing as previously
calculating the Fratio between the largest variance described. In this study, there were differences
and the smallest variance of the two groups being found in students' argumentative writing skills
tested. The calculation is by dividing the largest between students who studied with metacognitive
variance with the smallest variance of the tested learning strategies and groups of students who
group (Sudjana, p.1989), then compared with the studied with concept map learning strategies. This
Ftable value at the significant level α = 0.01 and the is evidenced by the two-way Anova test obtained
degrees of freedom respectively = 25 Fcalculation = 5.221> Ftable = 4.04 which was tested
Based on the calculation results obtained significantly at α = 0.05
Fcalculation = 1.75, while F0.001 (25 25) = 2.26. When This is because metacognitive learning
compared, then Fcalculation is smaller than Ftable or strategies can help students in writing in a well-
1.75 <2.62. This means that H0 is accepted. Thus, structured and focused manner. During the
two groups, namely the argumentative writing writing process, students generally find it difficult
skills of students learning with metacognitive to organize their ideas, which resulted in irregular
strategies (A1), and the other group, namely the essays. Metacognitive strategies are especially
argumentative writing skills of students learning helpful in overcoming these difficulties, namely
with the concept map strategy (A2), were in finding ideas and developing these ideas into
homogeneous. This means that between groups of argumentative writing, by looking at the overall
students learning with metacognitive strategies picture of the argument and assessing objectively
and groups of students learning with concept map whether the arguments and structure of the essay
strategies are treated the same. Based on the make sense. Metacognition strategies not only
results of the two-way analysis of variance help plan what to write, but are also useful when
(ANOVA), it can be explained: a). The results of writing it in a whole. To check whether the
the analysis of the two-way variance between writing is still in the correct writing flow, the
columns show: Fcalculation (A) = 5.22 is greater than essay can be reconfirmed with metacognitive.
Ftable = 4.04 at the significance level α = 0.05. It In contrast to the concept map strategy, this
shows that Ho is rejected and accepts H1. This strategy explores and utilizes a variety of one's
proves that there is a significant difference in past experiences as the main idea and a very
argumentative writing skills between students diverse source of written information to be
who learn with metacognitive learning strategies transcribed into written form. Of the many life
and students who learn with concept map learning experiences, topics can be selected based on
strategies. Statistical hypothesis: Ho: µA1 ≤ µA2, information from events which have been
H1: µA1> µA2. experienced by themselves or others.
The results of the two-way analysis of variance
between the columns show that the value of CONCLUSION
Fcalculation = 5.22 is greater than Ftable = 4.04 at the This study examines the effect of metacognitive
significance level α = 0.05. This means that Ho is learning strategies on students' argumentative
rejected and accepts H1. After testing the writing skills in semester III students of the
significant difference, the next step is to see English Language Education Study Program,
which is better student's argumentative writing Faculty of Teacher Training and Education,
skills between the two treatments. Based on the Universitas Kuningan. Metacognitive learning
results of the calculation, it turns out that the strategies and concept map learning strategies
average score of argumentative writing skills of were used as the learning strategies. Based on the
students who learn with metacognitive learning results of hypothesis testing described in the
strategies (A1) is 79.15 better than the previous chapter, the following conclusions can
argumentative writing skills of students who learn be drawn. Argumentative writing skills, students
with concept map learning strategies (A2) the who are given metacognition learning strategies
average score is 77.46. Thus, the argumentative are better than students who learn with concept
writing skills of students with metacognitive map learning strategies.
strategies are better than those with concept map Based on the conclusions, students'
strategies. argumentative writing skills in English can
improve if they learn using metacognitive

191
Erwin Oktoma, Zainal Rafli, & Aceng Rahmat
Metacognitive learning strategies in argumentative writing skills

learning strategies. These findings indicate that Lawson, Michael J. (1984). Being executive about
metacognitive learning strategies are effective in metacognition. In John R. Kirbi (Ed).
teaching students' argumentative writing in Cognitive strategies and educational
English. Regarding the results of this study, the performance. London: academic Press Inc.
1984.
application of different learning strategies is
Livingstone, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An
needed in students' argumentative writing learning. overview.
Based on the findings of the research results Macdonald, A., & Macdonald, G. (1996). Mastering
and the discussion of the conclusions above, it writing essentials. New Jersey: Practice Hall
turns out that metacognitive learning strategies Regent.
have a significant effect on students' McCrimmon, James M. (1984). Writing with a
argumentative writing skills in English. Thus, this purpose, USA: Houghton Miffin Co
research has implications, especially in planning Oxpord, R. L. (1990) Language learning strategies:
and developing learning strategies that will be What every teacher should know. Boston:
used in improving students' argumentative writing Heinle & Heinle Publisher
Panahandeh, Esmaeil., & Shahram, E. (2014). The
skills in English.
effect of planning and monitoring as
The finding that the argumentative writing metacognitive strategies on Iranian EFL
skills of students who were given metacognitive learners’ argumentative writing accuracy.
learning strategies were better than students who Procedia-Sosial and Behavioral Sciences,
were given concept map learning strategies had 98, 1409-1416.
implications, especially with regard to the Panahandeha,E., Esfandiari. S (2014). The effect of
application of appropriate learning strategies. In planning and monitoring as metacognitive
this case, the role of the lecturer is very important strategies on iranian EFL learners'
so that to improve students' argumentative writing argumentative writing accuracy. Procedia -
skills, metacognitive strategies are expected to be Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98.
Pitenoee. R.M., Modaberi. A., & Ardestani.M.E.
more effectively applied in class.
(2017). The effect of cognitive and
metacognitive writing strategies on content
REFERENCES of the iranian intermediate EFL learners’
Alwasilah, A. C. (2008). Filsafat bahasa dan writing. Journal of Language Teaching and
pendidikan, Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya, Research, 8(3).
Chamont, A. U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P. M., Retrieved from:
Robbins, |J. (1999). The learning strategies http://146.87.24.:9:300/,metacognition.htm.
hand book. London: Longman 2002.
Douglas J. Hacker. Metacognition: Definitions and Sanjaya, W. (2006). Strategi pembelajaran
empirical foundations. berorientasi standar proses pendidikan.
Feryal Cubucku. (2008). Enhancing vocabulary Jakarta: Kencana.
development and reading comprehension Santrock, J. W. (2004). Educational psychology. 2nd
through metacognitive strategies. Edition. New York: Mc GrawHill Company,
Educational Research, 18(1) Inc.
Flavel. H, John dan Patricia H. Miller. (1993). Schneider, W. (2008). The development of
Cognitive development. New Yersey: metacognitif knowledge in children and
Prentice Hall, adolescent: Major trends and implications
Flavell, J. H & Miller, P. H. (1993). Cognitive for education. Journal Compilation:
development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, International Mind, Brain and
Grifith, P. L. & Ruan, J. (2008). What is EducationSociety and Wiley Periodicals,
metakognitions and what should be its role 2(2).
in literacy intruction?’ In Susan E. Wage, W., Wage, Dantes, N., Dantes, G. R. (2015).
Metacognition is literacy learning. Mahwah: Implementasi pembelajaran peta konsep
Taylor & Francis terhadapmotivasi berprestasi dan hasil
Halter, coe.sdsu.edu,tanpa tahun, hh.2-3.diunduh 7 belajar siswa dalampembelajaran bahasa
Fabruari 2017. Indonesia kelas gugus VI kecamatan Abang.
http://www.psyc.Memphis.edu/trg/meta.htm e-Journal Program Pascasarjana
n(1).h,4. Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, 5.
Kirby, J. R. (1984). Strategies and processes In John R.
Kirby (Ed). Cognitive strategies and
educational performance. London:
Academic PressInc.
Larkin, S. (2010). Metacognition. London: Routledge

192