A significant amount of research on Metacognitive Online Reading Strategies (MORS) is currently focused on EFL/ESL students, and only a few studies have examined the participation of EFL teachers. This quantitative study, therefore, aimed at assessing the use of these strategies among EFL teachers in Indonesia. Analyses of the strategy usage was based on factors of gender, teaching status, and internet literacy levels. Via a Google form application, a MORS survey was employed as the data collection instrument. The gathered data were analyzed descriptively and inferentially using t-tests, Pearson correlation, and linear regression. The results showed that in reading online academic materials, the teachers used support strategies more frequently than problem-solving strategies and global strategies. Overall, the teachers employed these strategies at a moderate to high level. Based on gender and internet literacy, significant differences in the overall and strategy category uses were discovered. There were significant correlations between the teachers’ internet literacy levels and their use of the overall strategies, the support strategies, and the global strategies, but no correlation between the internet literacy levels and the problem-solving strategies. The internet literacy levels were found to be strong predictors of the overall and category strategy uses. The findings of this research offer a wide variety of educational implications for EFL reading.

Keywords: metacognitive online reading strategies; EFL teachers; gender; internet literacy; teaching status

Akyel, A., & Erçetin, G. (2009). Hypermedia reading strategies employed by advanced learners of English. System, 37(1), 136–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.05.002

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

Anshari, M., Almunawar, M. N., Shahrill, M., Wicaksono, D. K., & Huda, M. (2017). Smartphones usage in the classrooms: Learning aid or interference? Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 3063–3079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9572-7

Ardianingsih, W., & Salim, R. M. A. (2019). Perbedaan Gender pada Kesadaran Metakognitif dalam Strategi Membaca Bacaan Akademik. Jurnal Psikologi Teori Dan Terapan, 10(1), 74. https://doi.org/10.26740/jptt.v10n1.p74-84

Arrastia, M. C., Zayed, A. M., & Elnagar, H. Z. (2016). Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies among English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Preservice Teachers: An Exploration of Gender and Developmental Differences. International Research in Higher Education, 1(2), 46–57.

https://doi.org/10.5430/irhe.v1n2p46

Aziz, Z. A., Nasir, C., & Ramazani, R. (2019). Applying Metacognitive Strategies in Comprehending English Reading Texts. Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature, 19(1), 138. https://doi.org/10.24167/celt.v19i1.1863

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. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2017-1703-02

Bannert, M., Hildebrand, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2009). Effects of a metacognitive support device in learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 829–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.07.002

Chevalier, T. M., Parrila, R., Ritchie, K. C., & Deacon, S. H. (2017). The Role of Metacognitive Reading Strategies, Metacognitive Study and Learning Strategies, and Behavioral Study and Learning Strategies in Predicting Academic Success in Students With and Without a History of Reading Difficulties. Journal

of Learning Disabilities, 50(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219415588850

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. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.42.2.2

Dardjito, H. (2019). Students’ metacognitive reading awareness and academic English reading comprehension in EFL context. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 611–624. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12439a

Darwish, I. (2017). Meta Cognitive Strategy Use: Off or On in Online Reading. International Conference on Literature, History, Humanities and Social Sciences (LHHSS-17), Jan 1-2, 24–27. 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. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.17026

Fitrianti, N. A., & Susanti, A. (2021). Efl Students Metacognitive Strategies in Online-Based Learning: in Relation To Their Writing Quality. Paramasastra, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.26740/paramasastra.v8n1.p1-19

Huang, H. C. (2013). Online reading strategies at work: What teachers think and what students do. ReCALL, 25(3), 340–358. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344013000153

Huang, H. C., Chern, C. lan, & Lin, C. cheng. (2009). EFL learners’ use of online reading strategies and comprehension of texts: An exploratory study. Computers and Education, 52(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.003

Indriyani, G., & Pertiwi, I. S. (2021). Exploring the EFL Students’ Reading Strategies Used on Reading Academic Articles. PANYONARA: Journal of English Education, 3(2), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.19105/panyonara.v3i2.5008

Intan Sari, M. (2016). Cognitive and Metacognitive Reading Strategy Use and Reading Comprehension Performance of Indonesian EFL Pre-service Teachers. Journal of Foreign Languange Teaching and Learning, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.18196/ftl.1213

Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(NOV), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863

Mohseni, F., Seifoori, Z., & Ahangari, S. (2020). The impact of metacognitive strategy training and critical thinking awareness-raising on reading comprehension. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1720946

Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249

Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL Students’ Awareness of Reading Strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2–10.

Mudra, H. (2018). Metacognitive Online Reading Strategies among Pre-Service EFL Teachers in Indonesia. Educational Process International Journal, 7(2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2018.72.5

Naghdipour, B., & Kadhim, K. A. (2021). Exploring Omani EFL Students’ Written Linguistic Accuracy Development in Disciplinary Contexts. 3L The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 27(3), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.17576/3l-2021-2703-08

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

Öztürk, S. Y. (2018). Use of Metacognitive Online Reading Strategies by Student Teachers of English. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 3(3), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1297197

Peart, S. M. (2017). L2 Reading: Strategies and Gender Preferences in the Foreign Language Classroom. Lenguaje y Textos, 45(45), 17–27. https://doi.org/10.4995/lyt.2017.7437

Phakiti, A. (2008). Strategic Competence as a Fourth-Order Factor Model: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Language Assessment Quarterly, 5(1), 20–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300701533596

Pookcharoen, S. (2009). Metacognitive online reading strategies among Thai EFL university students. Graduate Theses and Dissertations (Vol. 71, Issues 2-A) [Indiana University]. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2010-99151-068&site=ehost-live

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. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.3.195-204

Rianto, A. (2021). Indonesian EFL university students’ metacognitive online reading strategies before and during the Covid-19 pandemic. Studies in English Language and Education, 8(1), 16–33. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/siele.v8i1.18110

Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2

Taki, S. (2016). Metacognitive online reading strategy use: Readers’ perceptions in L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading, 39(4), 409–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12048

Zenotz, V. (2012). Awareness development for online reading. Language Awareness, 21(1–2), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2011.639893

Zijlmans, E. A. O., Tijmstra, J., van der Ark, L. A., & Sijtsma, K. (2019). Item-score reliability as a selection tool in test construction. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(JAN), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02298