Exploring Reading Strategy Use Among Year 6 ESL Learners In Malaysian International and Government Schools

Exploring Reading Strategy Use Among Year 6 ESL Learners in Malaysian International and Government Schools

Ahmad Syazwan Safwan Yusri Readuan, Jester Daniel Jayes, Chang Li Sean, Sharmithashini, Bram Noor Amira Noordin, Wan Aeinisya Wan Ahmed, Harwati Hashim

University Kebangsaan Malaysia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.906000298

Received: 29 May 2025; Accepted: 07 June 2025; Published: 12 July 2025

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the use of language learning strategies (LLS) in enhancing reading skills among students from international and government schools. With reading recognized as a core component of English language proficiency, the research aims to identify the types and frequency of strategies used by students in different educational contexts. The study compares how learners from international and government school backgrounds approach reading tasks and whether disparities in curriculum, resources, and instructional practices influence their strategic learning behavior. A mixed-methods approach is employed, combining surveys and interviews to gain insights into students’ reading habits and strategy preferences. Findings are expected to reveal significant differences in LLS use, with international school students likely benefiting from greater exposure to strategy-based reading instruction and English-rich environments. The research highlights the importance of teaching effective reading strategies across all school types to foster independent learning and improve English proficiency among diverse learners.

Keywords: language learning strategies, reading skills, international school, government school, English language learning

INTRODUCTION

Reading remains a pivotal skill in language development, serving as a gateway to academic success, critical thinking, and lifelong learning. It is essential for acquiring knowledge across subjects and plays a central role in language proficiency, especially at the primary education level (Alharbi,2015). In today’s diverse educational environments, students utilize various language learning strategies (LLs) to enhance their reading comprehension and overall literacy. These strategies, which include cognitive, metacognitive, and socio-affective techniques, vary based on factors such as curriculum design, language exposure, learner autonomy, and school culture (Boakye Mai,2016;Griffiths & Incecay, 2016).

International school students often operate in more immersive and multilingual settings, where English is commonly used as the medium of instruction for all subjects. These contexts typically provide students with greater access to authentic materials, project-based learning, and flexible pedagogical approaches, which promote the use of diverse and self-directed reading strategies (Wang, 2022; Lee, 2017). In contrast, government school students may experience more structured, examination-focused instruction that emphasizes accuracy and rote learning over strategic reading practices (Mokhtari, Neelakshi, & Freihat, 2021). Despite these differences, students across both educational settings tend to employ common strategies such as skimming, scanning, predicting, inferring meaning, and monitoring comprehension (Sari & Kurniasih, 2020; Kolic-Vehovec, Bajšanski, & Roncevic Zubkovic, 2020).

Recent research underscores the importance of explicit reading strategy instruction tailored to learners’ linguistic and cultural contexts, which has been shown to significantly enhance reading engagement and comprehension outcomes (Rahimi & Zhang, 2018; Liu et al., 2020). Furthermore, the development of metacognitive awareness, which refers to students’ ability to plan, regulate, and reflect on their reading processes, has been strongly linked to improved reading performance, particularly among multilingual learners and those in English as a Second Language (ESL) settings (Wang, 2022; Teng, 2020). Therefore, exploring the similarities and differences in reading strategies between students in international and government schools can provide valuable insights into effective instructional practices. This study aims to determine the most effective reading strategies among Year 6 students, offering implications for more inclusive, equitable, and responsive language instruction.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Language learning strategies

Language learning strategies (LLS) are specific methods learners use to enhance their understanding and retention of a language. Oxford (1990) defines these strategies as actions taken by learners to make learning more effective and manageable. In the context of reading, LLS play a vital role in helping students decode, comprehend, and engage with texts in a meaningful way. LLS are generally categorized into six main groups: memory, cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affective, and social strategies. Among these, cognitive and metacognitive strategies are especially important for reading (Hong, 2017). Cognitive strategies involve direct manipulation of the language input, such as guessing meaning from context or summarizing a paragraph. Metacognitive strategies, meanwhile, include planning before reading, monitoring comprehension during reading, and evaluating understanding after reading. Studies have shown that proficient readers actively employ a mix of these strategies (Naomi & Michael-Mare, 2018). Research highlights that the use of LLS correlates with reading proficiency. For example, Naomi (2018) found that skilled readers tend to use more metacognitive strategies than less skilled readers. Additionally, more successful language learners use a greater variety of strategies more frequently. This suggests that effective reading is about language knowledge and how learners approach reading tasks.

In Malaysia, however, students often rely on translation and memorization when reading English texts (Khalid, 2016). These surface-level strategies can limit deeper comprehension and critical thinking. The lack of explicit strategy instruction in many classrooms further contributes to this issue. Teachers play a crucial role in modeling and encouraging strategic reading, yet many do not prioritize this in their teaching.

Factors such as motivation, learner autonomy, and access to resources also influence LLS use. Learners who are confident and motivated tend to experiment with more strategies. In contrast, those who struggle with self-belief may avoid using strategies altogether, believing they won’t be effective (Sandua, 2025). In the modern classroom, digital tools like online dictionaries and annotation apps have made strategy use more accessible. However, unequal access to technology, especially between students from international and government schools, can impact how frequently these tools are used. This disparity will be explored further in later sections.

In conclusion, language learning strategies are crucial in supporting students’ reading development. Encouraging and teaching these strategies can lead to more independent and confident readers. Recognizing how different school environments support (or neglect) LLS will provide valuable insights for improving reading instruction.

Reading skills

Reading is a fundamental skill in second language acquisition, particularly in English language learning. It provides learners with access to vocabulary, grammar structures, and cultural context, and is closely tied to academic success. According to Niculescu and Drogamir (2023), reading is not only about decoding words but also about constructing meaning, making predictions, and critically evaluating the text. As such, reading requires both linguistic knowledge and cognitive engagement.

In the context of English as a second language (ESL), reading is often one of the more difficult skills to master. Learners may struggle with unfamiliar vocabulary, complex sentence structures, and differences in writing styles. These challenges are compounded by limited exposure to authentic reading materials, especially in environments where English is not the primary language spoken at home. As a result, many students rely on surface-level comprehension techniques, such as word-for-word translation, which can hinder deeper understanding.

Effective reading instruction in language learning includes developing both lower-level skills (like word recognition and decoding) and higher-level skills (like inference, summarizing, and critical thinking). Ibrahim, Engku and Sarudin (2016) emphasize that vocabulary size is directly linked to reading comprehension; learners need to understand at least 95% of the words in a text to follow its meaning without significant difficulty. However, vocabulary knowledge alone is insufficient—students must also develop reading strategies to navigate unfamiliar texts. One of the key differences in reading skill development among learners lies in their exposure to reading strategies and the availability of resources. In many cases, students from international schools are introduced to diverse reading materials and strategy-based reading instruction from a young age. In contrast, students in government schools may experience a more exam-oriented approach, where reading is taught mainly to answer comprehension questions.

Furthermore, reading motivation plays a critical role in shaping students’ reading habits. Students who see reading as enjoyable and purposeful are more likely to engage with texts voluntarily and improve their skills over time. Ceyhan and Yildiz (2021) point out that motivated readers tend to read more frequently, which in turn builds fluency and comprehension. Teachers, therefore, must work to create engaging reading environments, encourage choice in reading materials, and provide feedback that builds student confidence. In multilingual and multicultural settings like Malaysia, the diversity of learners’ linguistic backgrounds can also influence their reading development. Students who are already literate in their first language often transfer some reading skills when learning English, while others may face challenges due to differences in writing systems or phonology.

To sum up, reading is a complex, layered skill that goes beyond basic word recognition. Developing strong reading abilities in ESL learners requires explicit instruction, access to meaningful materials, and an emphasis on strategy use. In the next section, we will explore how school context—whether international or government—impacts the support students receive in their reading development.

International School and Government School

The type of school a student attends—whether international or government—can significantly influence their English language learning experience, especially in the development of reading skills. These differences arise from variations in curriculum design, instructional methods, teacher qualifications, access to resources, and the overall learning environment. International schools generally follow global curricula such as the British, American, or International Baccalaureate (IB) systems, which place a strong emphasis on language proficiency and critical thinking skills. Richards and Pun (2021) stated that English is usually the medium of instruction across subjects, which offers students more exposure and practice in using the language. As a result, students in international schools tend to develop higher levels of English fluency, particularly in academic reading and writing. They are also often introduced to a wide range of reading materials and are encouraged to engage in discussions, independent reading, and project-based learning.

On the other hand, government schools—especially in countries where English is a second language—may face several limitations. In Malaysia, for example, English is taught as a subject rather than used as a medium of instruction. The curriculum is often exam-driven, focusing on grammar, vocabulary drills, and reading comprehension tasks aimed at preparing students for standardized tests. This narrow approach may limit students’ exposure to authentic reading materials and reduce their ability to develop a genuine interest in reading.

Teacher qualifications and training also differ between the two school types. International school teachers typically have specialized training in English as a Second Language (ESL) and are more familiar with student-centered approaches and modern language learning strategies. In contrast, teachers in government schools may have limited access to professional development opportunities and rely on more traditional, teacher-centered instruction. Another critical factor is access to resources. International schools are generally better funded and equipped with libraries, digital tools, and supplementary reading materials. Students are encouraged to use online platforms, participate in reading programs, and engage with multimedia content. Conversely, government school students may have limited access to such resources, especially in rural areas. This disparity in exposure can impact students’ vocabulary growth, comprehension skills, and motivation to read.

Furthermore, the learning environment and parental support often differ. International school students may come from households where English is regularly used or valued, while students in government schools may have fewer opportunities to practice English outside of the classroom. Parental involvement, socioeconomic status, and cultural attitudes toward English all influence how students perceive and approach language learning.

In conclusion, the school context plays a significant role in shaping students’ reading development in English. While international schools tend to offer a more conducive environment for language acquisition, government schools face structural and pedagogical challenges that must be addressed. Understanding these differences is essential in developing targeted strategies to support all learners, regardless of their educational background.

Research Questions

• What are the similarities of language learning strategies in reading skill among students in international school and government school?
• What are the differences of language learning strategies in reading skill among students in international school and government school?

Research Objectives

To determine the best language learning strategy among Year 6 pupils in terms of reading skills.

METHODOLOGY

Research Methodology and Design

This research study employed a case study design which is suitable for an in-depth investigation of a specific phenomenon within its real-life context. This design allows for a holistic understanding of the language learning strategies used by the students in different educational settings, considering the complex interplay of individual, social, and contextual factors (Rohmawati et al., 2022). Two sources of data were collected to ensure the trustworthiness and validity of the findings, including interviews, and questionnaires. The comparative case study approach will allow for a detailed analysis of similarities and differences in LLS use between a good English language learner from an international school and a good English language learner from a government school. Thus, offering insights into the factors that contribute to effective reading strategy implementation.

Participants

The participants for this study were selected from a Malaysian government school and an international school, one student which was deemed academically good in their English based on past examinations and teacher’s observation was chosen from each school. Both of the participants studied English as a second language for six years. The proficiency level of both students was advanced.

Procedure

Each participant was explained by the researcher about the study and consent was obtained from both students. The consent forms were given to the students and some particulars were filled and signed by their parents. The researchers focused on recalling students’ learning experience in school, specifically, reading tasks. After that, a questionnaire was administered to both students in order to determine their respective strategy in learning English reading skill.

Instrument

The questionnaire was used to collect quantitative data on the types and frequency of language learning strategies used by the students (Tee et al., 2021). The questionnaire comprised a mix of closed-ended and open-ended questions, allowing for both quantitative and qualitative data analysis. The quantitative data was analyzed descriptively to determine the frequency and percentage of different LLS used by the students. The questionnaire used in this study was adopted and adapted from the Modified Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) developed by Nguyen (2022). Nguyen (2022) developed the instrument based on comparisons and analysis between two well-known strategy systems by Oxford (1990) and Mokhtari & Sheorey (2002). The questionnaire consisted of 31 items and each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale (refer appendix a). The questionnaire assessed the students’ use of reading strategies, based on 5 aspects which were; (a) overviewing strategies, (b) problem dealing strategies, (c) supporting strategies, (d) guessing strategies, and (e) information dealing strategies. Additionally, another section of the questionnaire asks participants 10 open-ended questions which were developed based on Nguyen’s (2022) SORS (refer appendix b).

DATA ANALYSIS METHOD

The data collected was analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Descriptive analysis will be used to analyse the questionnaire data, while thematic analysis will be applied to the open-ended questions. This study employed a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative data to explore reading strategy use among Year 6 ESL learners from international (urban) and government (rural) schools in Malaysia. Mixed-methods research allows for both breadth and depth in understanding student behavior (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).

Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative data were obtained through a structured questionnaire consisting of 31 Likert-scale items that measured reading strategies across five categories: overviewing, problem dealing, supporting, guessing, and information dealing. Responses were rated on a 5-point scale (1 = Never, 5 = Always).

Descriptive statistical analysis was performed to examine the mean scores of strategy use within the two student groups. This method was selected due to its appropriateness in summarising Likert-type data, especially in small to medium sample studies where inferential statistical assumptions may not be met (Boone & Boone, 2012). The use of descriptive analysis allows for identifying patterns and trends in strategy preference without overextending conclusion.

Sample Table 1: Mean Scores of Reading Strategy Categories by School Type

Bar Chart: Average Strategy Use by Category

These results suggest that urban students tend to use more metacognitive strategies, such as previewing and evaluating text organization. In contrast, rural students showed slightly higher usage of supporting strategies like using dictionaries and taking notes, consistent with compensatory strategy findings in previous studies (Ismail & Yunus, 2020).

Qualitative Analysis

To gain deeper insights, six open-ended questions accompanied the questionnaire. These questions addressed how students prepare to read, deal with distractions, overcome difficult texts, and use tools like dictionaries or peer discussions. Responses were analysed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2019). Following Braun and Clarke’s (2019) six phase framework:

Familiarisation  :  All responses were read multiple times to gain an overall understanding.

Generating Initial Codes  : Key segments of data were coded manually, focusing on recurring actions, tools, or thought processes.

Searching for Themes  : Similar codes were grouped to identify broader thematic categories.

Reviewing Themes  : Themes were refined by checking them against the dataset to ensure internal consistency and distinctiveness.

Defining and Naming Themes  : Clear definitions were assigned to each theme, and representative quotes were identified.

Producing the Report : Themes were interpreted in relation to the research questions and discussed in context with existing literature.

Coding was conducted inductively, meaning themes emerged directly from the data rather than being imposed beforehand. To enhance trustworthiness, coding decisions were discussed collaboratively among researchers, and discrepancies were resolved through discussions. The analysis aimed to capture the differences in how urban and rural students implement reading strategies.

Sample Table 2: Emergent Themes from Open-Ended Responses

Pie Chart: Urban Students Strategy Use

Pie Chart: Rural Students’ Strategy Use

Urban students frequently mentioned previewing and self-monitoring (“I try to guess what it’s about first”), while rural students emphasized repetitive strategies and external aids (“I read it again and ask my friend”). By combining descriptive statistics and thematic coding, this approach offers a robust understanding of how ESL learners in different settings use reading strategies. It aligns with calls for context-aware language education (Rashid et al., 2021; Al-Mekhlafi & Al-Qudah, 2022).

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

This study explored the use of reading strategies among Year 6 ESL learners in Malaysian international (urban) and government (rural) schools through both quantitative and qualitative lenses. A total of 60 participants—30 from each school type—completed a reading strategies questionnaire with 31 items, along with six open-ended questions.

Quantitative Findings

Descriptive statistics revealed notable patterns in strategy use across both groups. Urban students reported higher use of overviewing strategies (M = 4.3) and information dealing strategies (M = 4.2), reflecting a stronger focus on pre-reading and comprehension monitoring. In contrast, rural students scored highest in supporting strategies (M = 4.3), indicating reliance on methods such as using dictionaries or talking to peers to support understanding.

A comparative analysis showed that urban students generally adopted a more metacognitive approach—planning, organizing, and evaluating their reading—while rural students employed more compensatory and memory-based strategies. These results are consistent with prior research highlighting differences in metacognitive awareness and strategy preferences based on educational exposure and resource access (Ismail et al., 2020; Teo & Goh, 2021).

Qualitative Findings

Thematic analysis of the open-ended responses further illustrated these trends. For overviewing strategies, urban learners often mentioned scanning headings and predicting content, while rural learners focused on rereading and highlighting key points. One urban student wrote, “I always look at the title and picture to guess what it’s about,” whereas a rural counterpart noted, “I just read slowly and look for bold words.”

In problem-dealing strategies, both groups emphasized rereading and focusing attention. However, urban students were more likely to mention self-questioning, e.g., “I ask myself what I just read,” suggesting higher engagement in cognitive monitoring (Mokhtar et al., 2019). Conversely, rural students relied more on repetition or reading aloud.

Supporting strategies among rural students included underlining text and using dictionaries, aligning with their highest quantitative mean. Urban students, on the other hand, favoured summarizing and using notes. One student shared, “I write down new words in a notebook and look them up later.”

Interestingly, guessing strategies were more commonly referenced by urban students, who reported using context clues to infer meanings. This reflects findings by Rahimi and Katal (2021), who noted that urban ESL learners are more inclined to use inferential techniques due to greater exposure to English through digital media.

Finally, information-dealing strategies were stronger among urban learners, who integrated text analysis with visual aids and bilingual thinking. One remarked, “I think in both English and Malay to understand better,” aligning with Ahmad and Sulaiman’s (2020) findings that bilingual mental processes enhance ESL reading comprehension.

Overall, the findings suggest a divergence in strategy use: urban students lean towards metacognitive and inferential approaches, while rural students rely on support tools and memory-based strategies. These distinctions point to the importance of differentiated instruction that considers learners’ backgrounds and access to resources (Yunus et al., 2022).

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study underscore the diverse reading strategy preferences among Year 6 ESL learners in Malaysian international and government schools. Urban (international school) students demonstrated a stronger inclination toward metacognitive strategies—such as overviewing, information dealing, and contextual guessing—whereas rural (government school) students leaned more on supporting strategies like rereading, underlining, and dictionary use.

These differences are likely rooted in variations in exposure, resource availability, and instructional methods. International school learners often engage in environments that promote English as the primary medium, encouraging critical reading habits such as scanning, predicting, and self-questioning. This aligns with studies by Mokhtar et al. (2019) and Teo and Goh (2021), which highlight the enhanced strategic awareness and access to resources in urban schools. Meanwhile, rural learners depend more on external tools or rote methods, often due to limited language exposure and less frequent engagement with English texts outside the classroom (Ismail et al., 2020).

Thematic analysis from open-ended responses further supports these patterns. Urban students frequently mentioned techniques such as “summarizing,” “self-questioning,” and “predicting,” reflecting an internalized reading process. In contrast, rural students reported strategies like “reading slowly,” “repeating,” or “asking for help,” which suggest a more reactive approach to comprehension challenges. This distinction is consistent with Rahimi and Katal’s (2021) findings that urban learners adopt more proactive cognitive strategies, while rural learners are more reliant on external aids.

It is also noteworthy that both groups use problem-dealing strategies, such as rereading and regaining focus when distracted, indicating a shared awareness of how to self-regulate during reading. However, the depth and variety of these strategies appear more developed among urban students, likely due to higher cognitive and metalinguistic exposure (Ahmad & Sulaiman, 2020).

LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Limitations

While this study provides valuable insights into the reading strategy use among Year 6 ESL learners in Malaysian international and government schools, several limitations must be acknowledged.

Firstly, the sample size for qualitative data was notably small, with only two interviewees participating in the interview phase. This limited number of participants restricts the depth and diversity of perspectives captured, which may not fully represent the broader population of Year 6 ESL learners. As such, the qualitative findings should be interpreted with caution and seen as indicative rather than comprehensive.

Secondly, the findings are context-specific and therefore limit generalisability. The study focuses on specific schools within Malaysia, and the results may not extend to all international and government schools in the country, especially those in different regions or with distinct demographic profiles. Variations in curriculum, teacher expertise, and available resources across schools could influence reading strategy use, further limiting the applicability of the findings to a wider population.

Suggestions

In light of the limitations identified in this study, several recommendations are proposed to guide future research and further enhance understanding of reading strategy use among ESL learners in Malaysian educational contexts.

Future studies should consider expanding the sample size and diversity to improve the generalisability of findings. Including a larger cohort of participants from multiple international and government schools across various geographic regions would allow for a more representative analysis and a deeper exploration of regional, cultural, and institutional influences on reading strategy preferences.

Besides, the qualitative component of this study was constrained by a limited number of interviewees. Subsequent research should seek to include a more balanced and extensive range of participants for interviews or focus groups, encompassing students from both school types. This would provide a richer, more nuanced understanding of the learners’ individual reading experiences, motivations, and cognitive processes.

Moreover, longitudinal studies are encouraged to trace the development of reading strategies over time. Observing learners as they transition from primary to secondary education could illuminate how exposure, curriculum progression, and language proficiency shape strategic reading habits and comprehension capabilities.

Given the observed gaps in metacognitive strategy use among government school learners, the development and evaluation of targeted intervention programs would be a valuable avenue for applied research. Such interventions could aim to explicitly teach metacognitive and cognitive strategies, possibly through scaffolded reading tasks, peer collaboration, or digital platforms designed to engage young learners.

All in all, the suggestions aim to build upon the current study’s findings and contribute to a more holistic understanding of how young ESL learners in diverse educational settings approach reading in English.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study reveals that while both rural and urban Year 6 ESL learners employ a range of reading strategies, the type and frequency differ significantly depending on context. Urban students are more strategic and flexible, benefiting from exposure and institutional support. Meanwhile, rural students adopt practical, straightforward techniques, influenced by access and language familiarity. These insights suggest that differentiated pedagogical approaches are necessary—urban classrooms may benefit from further deepening strategic reading, while rural settings should focus on expanding metacognitive awareness and gradually integrating inferential and guessing strategies into reading instruction.

Future research should involve a larger sample across diverse regions and possibly integrate intervention-based models to enhance specific strategy use among underperforming groups. Policymakers and educators must recognize these gaps and develop targeted training programs and resource provisions to ensure equitable language learning outcomes for all Malaysian ESL learners.

REFERENCES

1. Ahmad, N. & Sulaiman, T. (2020). Bilingual strategies in ESL reading. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 11(3), 250–258.
2. Alharbi, A. M. (2015). Building vocabulary for language learning: Approach for ESL learners to study new vocabulary. Journal of International Students, 5(4), 501–511.
3. Al-Mekhlafi, A., & Al-Qudah, F. (2022). Investigating L2 learners’ reading comprehension strategies. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(1), 25–33.
4. Boakye, N. A., & Linden, M. M. (2018). Extended strategy-use instruction to improve students’ reading proficiency in a content subject. Reading & Writing-Journal of the Reading Association of South Africa, 9(1), 1-9.
5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597.
6. Ceyhan, S., & Yıldız, M. (2021). The effect of interactive reading aloud on student reading comprehension, reading motivation and reading fluency. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 13(4).
7. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Sage.
8. Griffiths, C., & Inceçay, G. (2016). Styles and strategies-based instruction: A curriculum-based approach. ELT Journal, 70(3), 274–285. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccv070.
9. Ibrahim, E. H. E., Sarudin, I., & Muhamad, A. J. (2016). The Relationship between Vocabulary Size and Reading Comprehension of ESL Learners. English Language Teaching, 9(2), 116-123.
10. Ismail, K., & Yunus, M. M. (2020). ESL reading strategies among rural learners. Asian Journal of University Education, 16(4), 95–107.
11. Ismail, S., Ariffin, K., & Lim, H. (2020). ESL learners’ metacognitive reading strategies. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 689–704.
12. Khamees, K. S. (2016). An evaluative study of memorization as a strategy for learning English. International Journal of English Linguistics, 6(4), 248-259.
13. Kolić-Vehovec, S., Bajšanski, I., & Rončević Zubković, B. (2020). Metacognitive strategies and reading comprehension in elementary-school students. Psihologijske Teme, 29(1), 1–20.
14. Lee, S. (2017). Developing reading comprehension through metacognitive strategy instruction. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(10), 123–130.
15. Liu, Y., Wang, Z., & Park, T. (2020). Effects of strategy instruction on reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Educational Research, 104, 101650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101650
16. Mokhtar, F. A., Yahaya, M. F., & Samad, A. A. (2019). Reading strategies among Malaysian ESL learners. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 19(2), 45–60.
17. Nguyen, T. B. T. (2022). Reading strategy taxonomies: An overview. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 38(3).
18. Niculescu, B. O., & Dragomir, I. A. (2023). Critical reading: A fundamental skill for building 21st century literacy. In International Conference Knowledge-Based Organization (Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 215-220).
19. Rahimi, M., & Katal, M. (2021). Contextual guessing strategies in ESL learning. Asian Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 9(1), 12–24.
20. Rashid, R. A., Aziz, A. A., & Zainol, A. R. (2021). Reading strategy use among Malaysian ESL learners. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 123–138.
21. Richards, J. C., & Pun, J. (2023). A typology of English-medium instruction. Relc Journal, 54(1), 216-240.
22. Sandua, D. (2025). YOUR WORST ENEMY IS YOURSELF: STRATEGIES TO OVERCOME SELF-SABOTAGE AND ACHIEVE SUCCESS. David Sandua.
23. Shi, H. (2017). Learning strategies and classification in education. Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1(1), 24-36.
24. Teng, F. (2020). The benefits of metacognitive reading strategy awareness for young learners of English as a foreign language. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(9), 1073–1087. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1510487
25. Teo, A., & Goh, C. (2021). Reading strategy awareness among urban and rural ESL learners. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 4(2), 87–95.

APPENDICES (APPENDIX A)