frequently used, global strategies were rated moderately high, and support strategies were rated the least.

responses. Pedagogical implications include targeted vocabulary support, confidence-building, and balanced

training in global, problem-solving, and support strategies to develop strategic, independent readers.

In the current digital age, the ability to read critically and strategically has become even more crucial than ever,

as students must go through a huge number of printed and online texts of varying quality and complexity.

Therefore, reading remains as a vital component for academic success for undergraduate students, serving as

the primary gateway to acquiring and processing information across various disciplines. Grabe and Stoller

However, despite the importance of reading skill for undergraduates, many students are still facing challenges

in navigating complex academic reading content. Reading difficulties brought upon from limited vocabulary,

ineffective comprehension strategies, and struggles with online text navigation can significantly hinder

academic engagement and performance (Rahmat et al., 2020). These challenges are intensified in the modern

era, where interpreting and navigating online materials require additional cognitive and technological skills. To

address such difficulties, the use of purposeful reading strategies, particularly metacognitive strategies, has

been shown to enhance comprehension, self-monitoring, and adaptability across varied academic tasks

(Afflerbach et al., 2008). By applying strategies such as previewing, questioning, summarizing, and using

contextual clues, undergraduates can mitigate comprehension barriers and engage more effectively with

disciplinary content. Understanding the interplay between reading difficulties and strategy use is therefore

Is there a relationship between reading difficulties and reading strategies among undergraduates?

manage and control their own thinking while learning. Flavell describes metacognition as both the awareness

in this process: metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation.

Metacognitive knowledge refers to a learner’s understanding of how they learn, the nature of the task they

face, and the strategies that might help them complete it. Metacognitive regulation, on the other hand, is about

using that knowledge in practice as in planning how to approach a task, keeping track of progress, and making

By contrast, skilled readers tend to use a range of reading strategies such as predicting content, summarising

key points, asking themselves questions, and rereading complex parts of a text. These actions are deliberate

and reflective, and they require constant monitoring of understanding, hallmarks of strong metacognitive

regulation. Applying Flavell’s framework, this study proposes that metacognition acts as the bridge between

reading difficulties and reading strategies. Students with stronger metacognitive skills are more likely to

recognise their challenges and respond by adjusting their reading behaviour, while those with weaker

metacognitive abilities may not identify the problem or know how to respond effectively.

Figure 1: Conceptual framework of the study: Metacognitive awareness and regulation on reading difficulties

and strategies.

identification, making inferences and text organization.

Difficulties in comprehension caused by slow reading speed, poor working memory, and difficulty integrating

information across sentences or paragraphs.

Ineffective metacognitive reading strategies among undergraduates caused by the lack of comprehension skills

and the ability to apply reading strategies effectively.

Difficulties brought upon by the lack of background knowledge, technical vocabulary and the ability to adapt

to

text, predicting content, identifying the purpose of the text, utilizing background knowledge and recognizing

text organisation.

Strategies that involve managing difficulties in comprehension during the reading process by adapting reading

behaviour. This includes re-reading unclear sentences, slowing down or speeding up the reading process,

focusing on specific sections of the text, guessing the meaning of unknown words and breaking down complex

sentences.

Strategies to provide external assistance to reading comprehension and information retention through

supplemental tools or actions. This includes taking notes, highlighting key points, utilizing a dictionary or

prepared for class often made academic texts more difficult, and that they compensate by relying on global and

problem-solving strategies to refocus attention, while also using support strategies such as translation and

consulting additional materials; the authors argue for explicit strategy instruction to scaffold online academic

reading. Complementing this, Ali et al. (2022) explored comprehension problems among Pakistani university

learners using a mixed-methods design (questionnaires with 64 students plus semi-structured interviews with

nine English-department instructors). They found persistent obstacles such as complex/long sentences, weak

grammar knowledge, limited vocabulary, and heavy dictionary dependence with implications that departments

should strengthen grammar and vocabulary instruction, promote extensive reading beyond class, and train

teachers to deploy targeted techniques (e.g., chunking and other comprehension supports) to reduce processing

load during reading.

scripts and dense phrasing, and strategic responses. Learners who recognized their difficulty in parsing

structure were more likely to use summarizing and self-questioning tactics. The study’s implications called for

reading lessons that pair textual complexity with targeted strategy training, promoting metacognitive

awareness so learners can notice difficulty and respond adaptively with appropriate strategies.

The study by Syatriana et al. (2024) is done to investigate the application and awareness of metacognitive

reading strategies among students at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar and Samarkand State Institute of

strategies; Global Reading, Problem-Solving and Support Reading strategies. A total of 141 participants were

involved in the study and the data was collected through the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategy

and also making connections in the text. Lastly, readers can use support strategies such as activating prior

knowledge, making predictions or even summarizing the text.

Two items share the same highest mean of 4. Firstly, item 2 (M= 4, SD= 0.8) shows that the students reported

they tried to get back on tract when they lost concentration. Next, item 6 (M= 4, SD=0.8) states that learners

reading speed according to what they were reading. Item 5 (M=4, SD=0.8) states that the learners tried to

visualize information to help them remember. The lowest mean of 3.5 for item 4 (SD=0.9) states that the