Indonesian EFL university students' metacognitive online reading strategies before and during the Covid-19 pandemic

Agus Rianto

Abstract


This descriptive study focused on investigating the use of metacognitive online reading strategies that were associated with learning conditions before and during the Covid-19 Pandemic. The respondents were 244 Indonesian EFL students taking an English subject at the Borneo Tarakan University. Data were collected using the Online Survey of Reading Strategies (OSORS) through the application of Google Form. The collected data were analyzed descriptively and quantitatively. The results showed that before the pandemic, support strategies were used more frequently, while global strategies were used less frequently. During the pandemic, support strategies and problem-solving strategies were more dominantly used, while global strategies remained the least used. Although the students differed significantly in using the overall and categorical strategies, they did not have differences in using some of the individual strategies. The students were moderate users of the strategies before the pandemic and were high users during the pandemic. These results imply that EFL students need to have metacognitive awareness to help them better understand what they read online. This can be done by involving students more actively in the use of strategies, especially those that were not different when used before and during the Covid-19 pandemic.


Keywords


EFL students; metacognitive strategies; reading; online; Covid-19 pandemic

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ahmadian, M., & Pasand, P. G. (2017). EFL learners’ use of online metacognitive reading strategies and its relation to their self-efficacy in reading. Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 17(2), 117-132.

Alsofyani, A. H. (2019). Examining EFL learners’ reading comprehension: The impact of metacognitive strategies discussion and collaborative learning within multimedia E-book dialogic environments [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of South Florida.

Amin, F. M., & Sundari, H. (2020). EFL students’ preferences on digital platforms during emergency remote teaching: Video conference, LMS, or messenger application?. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 362-378.

Anderson, N. (2003). Scrolling, clicking, and reading English: Online reading strategies in a second/foreign language. The Reading Matrix, 3(3), 1-33.

Atmojo, A. E. P., & Nugroho, A. (2020). EFL classes must go online! Teaching activities and challenges during COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Register Journal, 13(1), 49-76.

Azmuddin, R. A., Nor, N. F. M., & Hamat, A. (2017). Metacognitive online reading and navigational strategies by science and technology university students. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 17(3), 18-36.

Cao, W., Fang, Z., Hou, G., Han, M., Xu, X., Dong, J., & Zheng, J. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Research, 287, 1-5.

Cheng, R. T. J. (2016). Reading online in foreign languages: A study of strategy use. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 17(6), 164-182.

Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214-257.

Darwish, I. (2017, January). Meta cognitive strategy use: Off or on in online reading [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Literature, History, Humanities and Social Sciences (LHHSS-17), Dubai, Uni Emirate Arab. https://doi.org/10.15242/ICEHM.ED0117029

Deliany, Z., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2020). Metacognitive reading strategies awareness and metacognitive reading strategies use of EFL university students across gender. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 421-437.

Gonzales, D., & St. Lous, R. (2018). Online learning. In J. Liontas & M. DelliCarpini (Eds.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching (pp. 1-6). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Huang, H. C. (2014). Online versus paper-based instruction: Comparing two strategy training modules for improving reading comprehension. RELC Journal, 45(2), 165-180.

Huang, H. C., Chern, C. L, & Lin, C. C. (2009). EFL learners’ use of online reading strategies and comprehension of texts: An exploratory study. Computers and Education, 52(1), 13-26.

Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other ICT. In R. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.) (pp. 1570-1613). International Reading Association.

Marboot, K., Roohani, A., & Mirzaei, A. (2020). Investigating Iranian EFL students’ metacognitive online reading strategies, critical thinking, and their relationship: A mixed-methods study. Issues in Language Teaching (ILT), 9(1), 151-182.

McAleer, M. (2020). Prevention is better than the cure: Risk management of COVID-19. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(3), 46.

Mendikbud. (2020). Surat edaran Mendikbud: Pembelajaran secara daring dan bekerja dari rumah dalam rangka pencegahan penyebaran coronavirus disease (COVID-19) [Minister of Education and Culture Circular: Learning online and working from home in order to prevent the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19)]. http://kemdikbud.go.id/main/files/download/51e9b72ef92c6d8

Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course ‘forced’ online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4), 1-3.

Mukhlif, Z., & Amir, Z. (2017). Investigating the metacognitive online reading strategies employed by Iraqi EFL undergraduate students. Arab World English Journal, 8(1), 372-385.

O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.

Omar, N. A. (2014). Online metacognitive reading strategies use by postgraduate Libyan EFL students. Engineering and Technology International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering, 8(7), 2281-2284.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Phakiti, A. (2008). Strategic competence as a fourth-order factor model: A structural equation modeling approach. Language Assessment Quarterly, 5(1), 20-42.

Pookcharoen, S. (2009). Metacognitive online reading strategies among Thai EFL university students [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Indiana University.

Ramli, N. F. M., Darus, S., & Bakar, N. A. (2011). Metacognitive online reading strategies of adult ESL learners using a Learning Management System. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(3), 195-204.

Rianto, A. (2020). Blended learning application in higher education: EFL learners’ perceptions, problems, and suggestions. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 55-68.

Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.

Taki, S. (2016). Metacognitive online reading strategy use: Readers’ perceptions in L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading, 39(4), 409-427.

Taki, S., & Soleimani, G. H. (2012). Online reading strategy use and gender differences: The case of Iranian EFL learners. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 173-184.

Vandergrift, L. (2002). “It was nice to see that our predictions were right”: Developing metacognition in L2 listening comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(4), 555-575.

Velavan, T. P., & Meyer, C. G. (2020). The COVID-19 epidemic. Tropical Medicine and International Health, 25(3), 278-280.

Wu, J. Y. (2014). Gender differences in online reading engagement, metacognitive strategies, navigation skills and reading literacy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 252-271.

Zenotz, V. (2012). Awareness development for online reading. Language Awareness, 21(1–2), 85-100.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v8i1.18110

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.