Integrating SQ4R Technique with Graphic Postorganizers in the Science Learning of Earth and Space

T. Djudin, R. Amir


This study examined the effect of integrating SQ4R reading technique with graphic post organizers on the students’ Earth and Space Science learning achievement and development of metacognitive knowledge. The pretest-posttest non-equivalent control group design was employed in this quasi-experimental method. The sample which consists of 103 seventh grade of secondary school students of SMPN 1 Pontianak was drawn by using intact group random sampling technique. An achievement test and a questionnaire of  Reading-Self Awareness were administered. The findings assert that there are significant difference of students’ achievement (F=5.594, p ‹ 0.05) and development of metacognitive knowledge (F= 13.906, p ‹ 0.05) among groups after having received the three distinctive treatments. Integrating SQ4R reading technique with graphic post organizers reveals an effective impact on the academic achievement (ES= 0.69) and the metacognitive knowledge in reading text (ES = 0.48). It confirms that a science teacher has to execute and model metacognitive strategies intentionally.


reading in science, achievement, metacognition

Full Text:



Abromitis, B. (2009). Metacognitive strategies for K-12 students : Teaching Students to be Strategic in Thinking will Improve Learning. Retrieved from http:// teaching-Strategies-mentorship. Suite Strategies for k-12 Students#xzzOf7wEC6yB

Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1989). Teaching text structure to improve reading and writing. The Reading Teacher, 43(2), 130-137.

Barton, M. L., & Jordan, D. L. (2001). Teaching reading in science. ASCD.

Bond, (1994). Reading Difficulties. Their Diagnosis and Correction. Boston : Allyn & Bacon, Inc.

Carin, A. A., & Sund, R. B. (1989). Guided discovery activities for elementary school science. Merrill Publishing Company.

Cohen, R.(1988). Effect Size (ES). Retrieved December 4, 2012, from http:// EffectSizeBecker

Coll, R. K., France, B., & Taylor, I. (2005). The role of models/and analogies in science education: implications from research. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 183-198.

Costa, A.L. (1985). Developing Minds. A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (3rd ed). Boston : Pearson Prentice Hall.

Dirkes, M. A. (1985). Metacognition: Students in charge of their thinking. Roeper Review, 8(2), 96-100.

Ellis, A.K., & Bond, J.B. (2014). An Analysis of Research on Metacognitive Teaching Strategies, Prodia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 32(116), 4015-4024.

Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (1996). The Expert Learner : Strategic, Self-Regulated, and Reflective. Instructional Science, 24(5), 1-24.

Fadel, C., Trilling, B., & Maya, B.M. (2016). Metacognitive Strategies are Powerful Tools ,for any Discipline, Inter-Discipline or for Learning in General. Retrieved July 14, 2017, from

Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, 21-29.

J.H. Fogarty. “Read About Best Practices in Metacognitive Strategies,†Internet: leader/reading/metacognitive-strategies.html, 1994, In Fountas & Pinnel, 2000.

Gaskins, I. W., Guthrie, J. T., Satlow, E., Ostertag, J., Six, L., Byrne, J., & Connor, B. (1994). Integrating instruction of science, reading, and writing: Goals, teacher development, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 1039-1056.

Glynn, S. M., & Muth, K. D. (1994). Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of research in science teaching, 31(9), 1057-1073.

Halloun, I. (1996). Schematic modeling for meaningful learning of physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 1019-1041.

Sada, C., & Novita, D. (2015). Improving Students’ Reading Comprehension on Recount Text by Using SQ4R and Media Booklet. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 4(6).

Holliday, W. G., Yore, L. D., & Alvermann, D. E. (1994). The reading–science learning–writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of research in science teaching, 31(9), 877-893.

Inspiration Sofware Inc. (2017). Teaching and Learning with Graphic Organizer. Retrieved July 4, 2017, from

Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2007). Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a foreign language, 19(1), 34-55.

Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. (2013). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 54 Tahun 2013 tentang Standar Kompetensi Lulusan Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah. Jakarta : Pustaka Nasional.

Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: The effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 281-310.

Koch, A. (2001). Training in Metacognition and Comprehension of Physics Texts, Science Education, 85(6), 758-768.

Kuhn, D., & Dean, Jr, D. (2004). Metacognition: A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory into practice, 43(4), 268-273.

Livingston, J. A. (1997). Metacognition: An Overview. Retrieved July 4, 2017 from http. www, gse. buffalo, edu/fas/shuell/CEP564/Metaeog. htm.

Mahdavi, M. (2014). An overview: Metacognition in education. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current Research, 2, 529-535.

McLain, K. V. M., Gridley, B. E., & McIntosh, D. (1991). Value of a scale used to measure metacognitive reading awareness. The Journal of Educational Research, 85(2), 81-87.

Mitchell, M.P. (2015). Metacognition: Nurturing Self-Awareness in The Classroom. Retrieved July 12, 2017, from

Nelson, T. O. (1999). Cognition versus Metacognition. In RJ Sternberg. The Nature of Cognition (pp. 625–641). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Palinscar, (1986). Teaching Reading as Thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Raharjo, et al. (2013). The Effectiveness of Using SQ4R (Survey, Question, Read, Record, Recite, Review ) Method To Improve Students Ability In Reading Narrative Text At The Tenth Grade Students Of SMAN 2 Purworejo In The Academic Year Of 2012/2013. SCRIPTA English Research Articles, 2(3), 12-15.

Rasinski, T. V., & Padak, N. (2004). Effective reading strategies: Teaching children who find reading difficult. Prentice Hall.

Ridley, D. S., Schutz, P. A., Glanz, R. S., & Weinstein, C. E. (1992). Self-regulated learning: The interactive influence of metacognitive awareness and goal-setting. The journal of experimental education, 60(4), 293-306.

Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in science education, 36(1-2), 111-139.

Spark Student Paper and Academic Research Kit (2017). Retrieved August 2, 2017, from

Spiegel, G. F., & Barufaldi, J. P. (1994). The effects of a combination of text structure awareness and graphic postorganizers on recall and retention of science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 913-932.

Swinson, K. (1992). Writing Activities as Strategies for Knowledge Construction and the Identification of Misconceptions in Mathematics. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 15(2), 7-14.

Tierney, (1980). Reading Strategies and Practices : Guide for Improving Instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Winn, W., & Snyder, D. (1996). Cognitive Perspectives in Psychology . In D.H. Jonassen, ed. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. (pp. 112-142). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Weinert, F. E., & Kluwe, R. H. (1987). Metacognition, motivation, and understanding.

Yakupoglu, F. (2012). The effects of cognitive and metacognitive strategy training on the reading performance of Turkish students. Practice and Theory in Systems of Education, 7(3), 353-358.

Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 121-169.


  • There are currently no refbacks.