Gender and Academic Program Differences in Metacognitive Online Reading Strategies Among EFL University Students
DOI:
10.29303/jipp.v11i3.5114Published:
2026-07-28Downloads
Abstract
Metacognitive online reading strategies are essential for helping English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students comprehend digital texts in higher education. However, studies investigating differences in these strategies based on gender and academic program among Indonesian EFL students remain limited. This study aimed to investigate the metacognitive online reading strategies employed by EFL students and examine whether significant differences existed based on gender and academic program. This study employed a descriptive quantitative survey design using a 15-item adapted version of the Online Survey of Reading Strategies (OSORS). The instrument demonstrated high reliability (Cronbach's Alpha = .892). A total of 223 students (51 males and 172 females) from eight study programs participated in the study. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the Mann-Whitney U test, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test. The findings revealed that Problem-Solving Strategies were the most frequently used (M = 4.14), followed by Global Strategies (M = 3.90) and Support Strategies (M = 3.80), all classified as high-use strategies. Significant gender differences were found in Problem-Solving Strategies (U = 3567, p = .042) and Support Strategies (U = 3343, p = .010), with female students demonstrating higher strategy use, whereas no significant difference was found for Global Strategies. Furthermore, no significant differences were identified among the eight academic programs for any strategy category (p > .05). In conclusion, metacognitive online reading strategies are influenced by gender but not by academic program, indicating that these strategies function as general academic literacy skills across disciplines. These findings support the integration of metacognitive reading strategy instruction into EFL higher education to enhance students' digital reading competence.
Keywords:
Academic Program, EFL, Gender differences, Metacognitive strategies.References
Abdullah, N. S., & Ismail, H. H. (2025). Click, think, read: Investigating the use of metacognitive online reading strategies among Malaysian ESL students. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, IX, 308-320, from https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.
Agrawal, P. K., Gore, R., Kumar, M., Kushwaha, V., Goenka, S., & Agrawal, S. (2025). Metacognitive awareness and academic performance: Implications from a cognitive neuroscience perspective in pre-service teacher education. Annals of Neurosciences, from https://doi.org/10.1177/09727531251361976.
Ahmadian, M. (2017). EFL learners’ use of online metacognitive reading strategies and its relation to their self-efficacy in reading. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 17(2), 117-132.
Anderson, N. J. (2003). Scrolling, clicking, and reading English: Online reading strategies in a second/foreign language. The Reading Matrix, 3(3), 1-33.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Deliany, Z, & Cahyono, B., C,. (2020). Metacognitive reading strategies awareness and metacognitive reading strategies use of EFL university students across gender. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 421–37. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.17026.
Dika, J., Jafar, M. B., & Mahmud, M. (2021). Male and female EFL students’ language learning strategies. Celebes Journal of Language Studies, 1(2):242–55. from https//doi.org/10.51629/cjls.v1i2.67.
Freihat, N. M., (2022). University EFL students’ metacognitive online reading strategies and their reading performance on screen and on paper. International Journal of Learning and Development, 12(4):44–63. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijld.v12i4.20451.
Ghadamgahi, M., & Ghafournia, N. (2024). The intersection of gender, culture, and metacognitive reading strategies in Iranian EFL education: A mixed-methods analysis in pursuit of inclusion and equity. J-SHMIC : Journal of English for Academic, 11(1): 1–19. from https//doi.org/10.25299/jshmic.2024.vol11(1).16059.
Habók, A., Oo, T. Z., & Magyar, A. (2024). The effect of reading strategy use on online reading comprehension. Heliyon 10(2), from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24281.
Harimurti, K. F., Basthomi, Y., & Zen, E. L. (2023). EFL students’ preferences on metacognitive reading strategies within an extensive reading program. Journal on English as a Foreign Language 13(1), 171–94. https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v13i1.5640.
James, S. R. (2025). Digital reading and comprehension experiences : A focus on new narratives and user experience. Journal of Humanities and Education Development 7(5):22–27.
Karpenko, O. M., Lukyanova, A. V., Bugai, V. V., & Shchedrova, I. A. (2019). Journal of history culture and art research. Individualization of learning : An investigation on educational technologies. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 8(3), 81–90. from https//doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v8i3.2243.
Koch, C., & Fehlmann, F., (2025). Beyond digital literacy: Exploring factors affecting digital performance of university staff. Media and Communication, 13:1–20. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.8913.
Mahmood, M. A. (2022). The role of reading in enhancing EFL learners’ language proficiency. Qalaai Zanist Scientific Journal, 7(4), from https://doi.org/10.25212/lfu.qzj.7.4.49.
Mekheimer, M. (2025). Digital mind magnets as a scaffold for improving EFL online reading comprehension. Discover Education, 4(1), from https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00988-4.
Ningsih, A. A., Weganofa, R., & Mafulah, S. (2023). Exploring the challenges of digital textbooks in reading comprehension. KLAUSA (Kajian Linguistik Pembelajaran Bahasa Dan Sastra). 7(2), 29–36. from https://doi.org/10.33479/klausa.v7i2.844.
Nurisma, R. A., & Basthomi, Y. (2025). Investigating gender gap in metacognitive reading strategy: unearthing practical challenges in online EFL reading. Wiralodra English Journal. 9(2), 194–210. from https://doi.org/10.31943/wej.v9i2.476.
Rianto, A. (2021). Examining gender differences in reading strategies, reading skills, and English proficiency of EFL university students. Cogent Education. 8(1). from https//doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1993531.
Richards, J. C., & Renandya W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Ryandini, E., Y., Utomo D. T. P., & Daristin, P. E. (2025). Analysing metacognitive strategies used in reading scientific article: A case study of EFL university students. Journal on Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, from https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.
Satriani, E. (2017). The effect of using online reading resources toward students’ reading comprehension in extensive reading class. J-SHMIC Journal of English for Academic. 4(2), 37–47.
Subramaniam, S. K., Komarudin, N. E., Alih, N. A. C., & Fakhruddin, S. S. (2024). Investigating the influence of metacognitive awareness in academic reading. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences. 6(1), 148–161. https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2024.6.1.13
Wallace, M. P., Li, V. M., Huang, T. C., & He, N. C. (2021). Metacognitive strategy use for EFL readers: differences in gender and reading ability. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language. 25(2),1–22.
Yusof, D. A. A. (2021). Reading habits among students in the digital era: Changes of trends and behaviours. Journal of Academic Library Management (AcLiM). 1(1), 43–54. from https//doi.org/10.24191/aclim.v1i1.5.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nur Annisa Fitri, Selvi, Rifqi Pratama, Dewi Wijaya Putri, Hafiz Anshari, Intan Nuraini, Abdul Syahid
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
klik di sini 
