1. 研究目的与意义（文献综述包含参考文献）

The Relationship Between Meta-cognitive Strategies and EFL Reading 元认知策略与英语阅读之间的关系 Introduction Meta-cognitive strategies ability is closely related to an EFL learner#8217;s reading ability. So far much research has done on the improvement of EFL reading (Anat Zohar, 1980; J Pelletier, 2006; XU Li-Hua, 2014). But little has been done on the relationship between meta-cognitive strategies and overall reading ability. This study is aimed to make a learn about the relationship between meta-cognitive strategies and EFL reading output among different EFL learners in order to unearth the relativity and diversity. The motives of the study is the relationship between meta-cognitive strategies and EFL reading. Meta-cognitive strategies refers to methods used to help students understand the way they learn; in other words, it means processes designed for students to think about their mind. The consequence will help diagnostician to find deficiency in the process of teaching. Furthermore, it#8217;s a great example for EFL to improve the reading ability themselves. During the past decades, much study has been conducted on the relationship between meta-cognitive strategies and listening or other abilities. Actually, the reading ability is becoming more and more important. Truly comprehending reading involves students actively engaging with a text and accurately deciphering the layers of meaning. It is very important for students to develop solid reading comprehension skills because statistics show that people who have low reading comprehension ability suffer in academic, professional, and personal pursuits. However, so far the relationship between EFL reading and this strategy has been rarely studied. Therefore, this study is conducted to make a further learning of EFL learners#8217; reading and the situation where learners use meta-cognitive strategies, in order to see how reading and strategies are related in EFL learners#8217; ability development. The research is directed on a relationship between meta-cognitive strategies and reading among EFL learners of different levels. Therefore the research can be divided into two parts. First of all, a questionnaire of how about the meta-cognitive strategies the college students use, and reading is made among learners of the same level, and then differences in reading comprehension. Hence some facts about how reading ability and meta-cognitive strategies in EFL learning are related can be detected.

毕 业 设 计（论 文）开 题 报 告

Literature review The aim of the study is to make the relationship between meta-cognitive strategies and reading ability in EFL learning. According to O#8217;Malley amp; Chamot#8217;s opinion, neta-cognitive strategies are about thinking in the learning process, planning for learning, monitoring of comprehension or production while it was taking place,and self-evaluation after the learning activities finished(O#8217;Malley amp; Chamot, 1990). O#8217;Malley and Chamot have further classified meta-cognitive strategy into four types: plan, choice, supervision and evaluation. Meta-cognitive strategies, which contain an awareness of what one was doing and the strategies one was using, learning, involve an appropriate learning strategy ignited one#8217;s thinking as well as knowledge about the actual progress ability to manage and regulate for different situation. The conscious application of meta-cognitive could cause more far-reaching learning and achievement, especially among learners, were basic learners without orientation or chance to plan their learning, monitor their learning progress, or review their accomplishments and future learning direction(O#8217;Malley amp; Chamot, 1990). In China, researches on learning strategies started in 1970s. Compared to the results achieved in western countries, the researches of meta-cognitive strategies in China are still in its infancy. Linguists in our country studied meta-cognitive strategies generally by introducing theories from abroad. Then, they focused on their studying objects and practiced on the basis of the theories, and they took Chinese practical situation into consideration and develop their own approaches. Wen Qiufang (1996)has firstly talked about adjusting role of meta-cognitive strategy. Liu Peihua(1998)has believed that all the language matching processes were managed by meta-cognition. Studies on meta-cognitive strategy in English reading have identified self-regulatory processes can help to develop performance and give some instructional suggestions on reading. Carrell(1989)confirms his findings in the comparision of the behaviors of successful college readers. In successful learners#8217; view, knowledge is taken systematically but not separately. They try to understand meanings and relationships of the reading passage instead of concentrating on te details. They usually test themselves to insure they know and remember what they have read. Baker(1984) has reviewed some studies with adult readers. She pointed out that good readers who were good students tend to have awareness and hanve good command of their own cognitive activities during reading process compare with poor readers. Good readers planed regularly, paid attention to task requirements and predicted reading content. They preferred to apply strategies to enhance their own understanding and meet task demands. Good readers were also adept in checking and monitoring actuality test, and commanding their learning process. Methodology This study will begin with a questionnaire, and there are some questions like following ones. Do you set goals before reading? And there will be four choices which means different degrees, like Always, Usually, Seldom and Never. After this, the test will be combined with these answers of the questionnaire. As for analyzing, SPSS will be used for statistics#8217; analyze. Conclusion The findings of the statistical analyses in Chapter Four can be summarized as follows: Firstly, there exists an intra-group difference in syntactic complexity between sentence-combining and writing, with a greater syntactic complexity in writing than in sentence-combining, suggesting that EFL learners subordinate clauses more frequently in writing than they do in sentence-combining. However, they tend to adopt clause reductions when performing sentence-combining task, leading to a decline of C/T in sentence-combining. Secondly, an inter-group comparison of syntactic complexity shows that there is no significant inter-group difference of syntactic complexity, both in writing and sentence-combining. EFL learners with different proficiencies don#8217;t differ much in their syntactic complexity. In other words, different proficiencies have almost no influence on syntactic subordination (C/T). This has shown a lack of training of syntactic complexity on EFL learners. In conclusion, syntactic complexity in writing is higher than that in sentence-combining among EFL learners. However, either in EFL writing or sentence-combining task, syntactic complexity, measured by C/T, doesn#8217;t significantly discriminate different proficiencies.

References XU Li-Hua, CQ Xie (2014). An Empirical Study on English Writing Metacognitive Strategies for Non-English Major Undergraduates. Journal of Neijiang Normal University, 14(2), 39-43 EK Horwitz (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. PL Carrell，L Gajdusek，T Wise (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. J Pelletier (2006). Relations Among Theory of Mind, Metacognitive Language, Reading Skills and Story Comprehension In L1 and L2 Learners Theory of Mind and Language in Developmental Contexts, pp. 31-64 B Latawiec. (2010). Text structure awareness as a metacognitive strategy facilitating EFL/ ESL reading comprehension and academic achievement. International Journal of Learning. Anat Zohar. (1980). The Nature and Development of Teachers' Metastrategic Knowledge in the Context of Teaching Higher Order Thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences. A Phakiti. (2006). Modeling cognitive and metacognitive strategies and their relationships to EFL reading test performance. L Baker, AL Brown (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading PL Carrell，L Gajdusek，T Wise (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Springer Netherlands, 19(1-2):229-243 K Vanlehn，W Burleson, (2011). The Affective Meta-Tutoring Project: How to motivate students to use effective meta-cognitive strategies. Cognitive Strategies S Girard, ME Chavez-Echeagaray, J Gonzalez-Sanchez. (2013) The Affective Meta-Tutoring Project: Lessons Learned. Intelligent Tutoring Systems Limei Zhang； Christine Goh； Antony Kunnan. (2012) Investigating the Relationships between Chinese College Test Takers#8217; Metacognitive Strategy Use and EFL Reading Test Performance. Proceedings of the Second Northeast Asia International Symposium on Language， Literature and Translation 邹妍洵，2004，元认知策略在EFL英语阅读中的应用。《全国大学英语教学改革 暨网络环境下外语教学学术研讨会论文集》 徐锦芬； 李红； 李斑斑; 2010，大学生英语阅读能力自我评价的实证研究。《解放军外国语学院学报(社会科学版), 33(5):46-50 Outline 1. Introduction 1.1 Need for the study 1.2 Research purpose 2. Literature review 2.1 Syntactic complexity in sentence-combining 2.2 Syntactic complexity in writing 2.3 Related empirical studies 2.4 Problems in the previous studies 3. Methodology 4. Results and discussion 4.1 Results 4.2 Discussion 5. Conclusion 5.1 Major findings of the study 5.2 Implications 5.2.1 Theoretical implications 5.2 2 Pedagogical implications 5.3 Limitations and suggestions for future research

2. 研究的基本内容、问题解决措施及方案

This study will begin with a questionnaire, and there are some questions like following ones. Do you set goals before reading? And there will be four choices which means different degrees, like Always, Usually, Seldom and Never. After this, the test will be combined with these answers of the questionnaire. As for analyzing, SPSS will be used for statistics#8217; analyze.