A Conceptual Paper on Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies in L2 Reading among Tertiary ESL Learners

Reading is central to academic success, yet many ESL learners approach texts passively, focusing on content rather than adopting strategic reading practices. Consequently, this often results in surface-level processing, which limits both comprehension and meaningful understanding. Past research has highlighted that reading in a second language is more complex than reading in one's first language, requiring not only linguistic knowledge but also the systematic use of effective strategies. The literature distinguishes between cognitive strategies, which help readers decode and construct meaning, and metacognitive strategies, which enable them to plan, monitor, and evaluate their comprehension. Across diverse ESL contexts, findings have shown uneven development of strategic awareness among learners. At the tertiary level, integrating both cognitive and metacognitive strategies is crucial. Cognitive strategies strengthen understanding and retention, while metacognitive strategies foster self-regulation and autonomy. Effective instruction, therefore, requires explicit modelling of strategy use, enabling learners to internalise and apply it during academic reading. This paper concludes that the dynamic interplay between cognitive and metacognitive strategies is vital for fostering deep comprehension and enhancing the academic performance of ESL learners.

cognitive, metacognitive, reading strategies

1. Ali, A. M., & Razali, A. B. (2019). A review of studies on cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies in teaching reading comprehension for ESL/EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 12(6), 94–111. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Anderson, N. J. (2012). Reading instruction. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to pedagogy and practice in second language teaching (pp. 218–226). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Awang, N. A., Pauzi, N. M., Ismail, W. S. A. W., Ab Ghani, M. A., & Hassanuzin, S. (2024). Assessing metacognitive strategies for L2 reading: Insights from tertiary ESL classrooms in Kelantan. Quantum Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(6), 442–452. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Babaii, E., Permyakova, T. M., & Pozdeeva, E. V. (2021). Strategies in performing a multi-level C-test: Applying think-aloud protocols. Journal of Language and Education, 7(3), 1–12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353–394). Longman. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Christhilf, K., Newton, N., Butterfuss, R., McCarthy, K. S., Allen, L. K., Magliano, J. P., & McNamara, D. S. (2022). Using Markov models and random walks to examine strategy use of more or less successful comprehenders. Proceedings of the International Educational Data Mining Society Conference. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Eskey, D. E. (2005). Reading in a second language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 563–580). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. González-Betancor, S. M., Fernández-Monroy, M., Galván-Sánchez, I., & López-Puig, A. J. (2022). Academic performance of first-year university students: Modelling the role of reading competence. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(6), 1422–1437. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Jaiswal, P. (2025). Cognitive, metacognitive, and digital reading strategies in English education: A 20-year review. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature & Translation, 8(9), 10–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Javed, M., Eng, L. S., Mohamed, A. R., & Ismail, S. A. M. M. (2016). Identifying reading strategies to teach literal, reorganisation and inferential comprehension questions to ESL students. Journal of Asia TEFL, 13(3), 204–210. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kaskosh, E., & Khateb, A. (2021). Implementing meta-cognitive learning strategies to improve intertextual Arabic comprehension competences: An intervention study among Arabic-speaking tenth graders. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 11(7), 757–767. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Le, H. V., Nguyen, T. A. D., Le, D. H. N., Nguyen, P. U., & Nguyen, T. T. A. (2024). Unveiling critical reading strategies and challenges: A mixed-methods study among English major students in a Vietnamese higher education institution. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2326732. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mohammadi, R. R., Saeidi, M., & Abdollahi, A. (2023). Modelling the interrelationships among self-regulated learning components, critical thinking and reading comprehension by PLS-SEM: A mixed methods study. System, 117, 103120. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249–259. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students' awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2–11. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning styles and strategies. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (GURT) 1990: Linguistics, language teaching and language acquisition (pp. 438–456). Georgetown University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 293–316. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Rajab, A., Rahman, H. A., Wahab, S. R. A., Nor, F. M., Zakaria, W. Z. W., & Rajim, W. Z. (2017). Metacognitive reading strategies among undergraduates. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(7), 548–551. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Razak, N. Z. A., Gani, N. A. A., & Ithnin, N. H. C. (2018). Reading metacognitive strategies employed by ESL learners. IRA International Journal of Education and Multidisciplinary Studies, 12(3), 61–73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Shih, M. (1992). Beyond comprehension exercises in the ESL academic reading class. TESOL Quarterly, 26(2), 289–318. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. RAND Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Suharto, P. P., Damayanti, I. L., & Lengkanawati, N. S. (2025). Exploring metacognitive strategies to support young learners in developing their learner autonomy. International Journal of Language Education, 9(2), 331–355. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Takallou, F. (2011). The effect of metacognitive strategy instruction on EFL learners’ reading comprehension performance and metacognitive awareness. Asian EFL Journal, 13(1), 272–300. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Urrutia, M., Mariángel, S., Pino, E. J., Guevara, P., Torres-Ocampo, K., Troncoso-Seguel, M., Bustos, C., & Marrero, H. (2024). Impact of affective and cognitive variables on university student reading comprehension. Education Sciences, 14(6), 554. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Wang, C., You, X., & Lu, J. (2023). Reading ability and challenges in a project-based academic report writing course: A test of the threshold hypothesis. Language Teaching Research, 27(4), 568–585. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Wen, Q. F. (2003). The successful way of learning English. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Yayli, D. (2010). A think-aloud study: Cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies of ELT department students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 38(3), 234–251. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Zhang, L., & Seepho, S. (2013). Metacognitive strategy uses and academic reading achievement: Insights from a Chinese context. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 70–85. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Zhang, L. J. (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students’ metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10(4), 268–288. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Zhang, L. J., & Wu, A. (2009). Chinese senior high school EFL students’ metacognitive awareness and reading-strategy use. Regional Language Centre Journal, 40(1), 97–111. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• What the Desert Fathers Teach Data Scientists: Ancient Ascetic Principles for Ethical Machine-Learning Practice
• Comparative Analysis of Some Machine Learning Algorithms for the Classification of Ransomware
• Comparative Performance Analysis of Some Priority Queue Variants in Dijkstra’s Algorithm
• Transfer Learning in Detecting E-Assessment Malpractice from a Proctored Video Recordings.
• Dual-Modal Detection of Parkinson’s Disease: A Clinical Framework and Deep Learning Approach Using NeuroParkNet