Zuriyani Md. Yasin, Mohamed Ismail Ahamad Shah


This paper presents a study on the interactive roles of lexical knowledge and reading strategies on reading comprehension performance of ESL learners. It examines how the lexical knowledge or the reading strategies contribute to second language (L2) reading comprehension. It also investigates whether there is a relationship among the three main variables which are lexical knowledge, reading strategies and reading comprehension performance. The Survey of Reading Strategy (SORS), the Vocabulary Levels Test, a writing test and a reading comprehension test were administered to 70 students from the Public Administration Course through convenience sampling method. Descriptive statistics was used to describe the participants’ performance on the three tests and their reading strategies used as well as to assess the relationship between the three main variables of this study. On the whole, the participants reported using most of the reading strategies with high and moderate frequencies. Apart from that, it is found that, the students’ word mastery level is only 2,000 word families, which is far below the minimum level required for tertiary education. There is no correlation found between the reading strategies used and the reading comprehension achievement of the participants. On the other hand, a statistically significant relationship (r= .739, p<0.01) was found between the participants vocabulary size and reading comprehension performance. The findings of this study help both language teachers and students to acknowledge the roles of lexical knowledge and reading strategies in improving the L2 reading comprehension performance.


Keywords: Global strategies, lexical knowledge, problem-solving strategies, reading strategies, support strategies.


Cite as: Zuriyani, M. Y. & Mohamed Ismail, A. S. (2019). The interactive roles of lexical knowledge and reading strategies on reading comprehension performance. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 4(1), 273-299.

Full Text:



AbManan, N. A., Azizan, N., Fatima, N., & Mohd, W. (2017). Receptive and productive vocabulary level of diploma students from a public university in Malaysia. Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Science, 7(1S), 53-59.

Alami, M. (2016). Cross-gender comparison of metacognitive strategies utilized by Omani students in reading comprehension classes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5(4), 20-28.

Al-Nujaidi, A. (2000). The relationship between vocabulary size, reading strategies, and reading comprehension of EFL learners in Saudi Arabia. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado.

Amua-Sekyi, E. T., Nti, S. K., & Atiah, P. G. (2015). Reading comprehension strategies of college students: Bridging the gap. International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Literature, 3(11), 57-70.

An, S. (2013). Schema Theory in reading. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(1), 130-134. Finland: Academy Publisher Manufactured in Finland.

Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460-472.

Anjomshoa, L. & Zamanian, M. (2014). The effect of vocabulary knowledge on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners in Kerman Azad University. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL), 2(5), 90-95.

Baleghizadeh, S. & Golbin, M. (2010). The effect of vocabulary size on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Linguistic and Literary Broad Research and Innovation, 1(2), 33-46.

Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Carrell, P. (1983). Some issues in studying the role of schemata, or background knowledge in, in second language comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 1(2), 81-92.

Clark, M. (1979). Reading in Spanish and English. Language Learning, 29(1), 121-150.

Dhanapala, K. (2010). Sri Lankan University students’ metacognitive awareness of L2 reading strategies. Journal of International Development and Cooperation, 16(1), 65-82.

Engku, H., Khairiah, O., Isarji, S., & Ainon, J. M. (2013). Measuring the vocabulary size of Muslim pre-university students. World Applied Sciences Journal, 21(1), 44-49.

Farrell, T. (2012). Novice-service language teacher development: Bridging the gap between preservice and in-service education and development. TESOL Quarterly, 46(3), 435-449.

Goulden, R., Nation, I. S. P., & Read, J. (1990). How large can a receptive vocabulary be? Applied Linguistics, 11(4), 341-463.

Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching & learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hellekjaer, G. O. (2009). Academic English reading proficiency at the university level: A Norwegian case study. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(2), 198-222.

Huang, S.-C. (2006). Reading English for academic purposes — What situational factors may motivate learners to read? System, 34(3), 371-383.

Karakoç, D. & Köse, G. D. (2017). The impact of vocabulary knowledge on reading, writing and proficiency scores of EFL learners. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(1), 352-378.

Koda, K. (1989). The effects of transferred vocabulary knowledge on the development of L2 reading proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 22(6), 529-540.

Kroner, D. (2012). Reading comprehension: Top-down and bottom-up processing and the importance of prior knowledge. Retrived from

Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know and words you can’t guess. In J. Coady, & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 20-34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Laufer, B. (1996). The lexical threshold of second language reading comprehension: What it is and how it relates to L1 reading ability. In K. Sajavaara & C. Fairweather (Eds.), Approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 55-62). Jyväskylä, Finland: University of Jyväskylä.

Laufer, B. (1992). Reading in a foreign language: How does L2 lexical knowledge interact with the reader's general academic ability'. Journal of Research in Reading, 15(2), 95-103.

Laufer, B. & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language testing, 16(1), 33-51.

Li, J. (2008). Metacognitive knowledge, vocabulary size and EFL reading comprehension of Chinese tertiary students. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.

Lili, Z. (2016). A study on Chinese EFL learners’ vocabulary usage in writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(4), 752-759.

Maasum, T. N. R. T. M., Maarof, N., Yamat, H., & Zakaria, E. (2012). An investigation of teachers' pedagogical skills and content knowledge in a content-based instruction context. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 75-90.

Salah, S. M. (2008). The relationship between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension of authentic Arabic texts. (Unpublished master thesis). Brigham Young University.

Mehrpour, S., Razmjoo, S. A., & Kian, P. (2011). The relationship between depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 5(2), 97-127.

Mokhtari, K. (2008). Perceived and real-time use of reading strategies by three proficient triliterate readers: A case study. In K. Mokhtari, & R. Sheorey (Eds.), Reading strategies of first- and second-language learners: See how they read (pp. 143-160). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc.

Mokhtari, K. & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 1-10.

Mokhtari, K. & Reichard, C. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.

Mounir, H. (2017). The relationship between morphological knowledge and the breadth of vocabulary knowledge among Morrocan EFL university students. Advances in Psychology, 2(2), 14-22.

Munsakorn, N. (2012). Awareness of reading strategies among EFL learners at Bangkok University. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 6(5), 253-257.

Murphy, J. (2004). Attending to word-stress while learning new vocabulary. English for Specific Purposes, 23(1), 67-83.

Na, L. & Nation, I. S. P. (1985). Factors affecting guessing vocabulary in context. RELC Journal, 16(1), 33-42.

Naginder, K., Nor Hayati, O., & Muhammad Kamarul Kabilan, A. (2008). Lexical competence among tertiary students: teacher-student perspectives. The English Teacher, 37(1), 90-104.

Nation, I. S. P. (2008). Teaching vocabulary: Strategies and techniques. Boston: Heinle Cengage Learning.

Nation, I. S. P. (2003). Vocabulary. In D. Nunan. (ed.), Practical English language teaching (pp. 129-152). New York: McGraw Hill.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.

Nation, I. S. P. (1983). Testing and teaching vocabulary. Guidelines, 5(1), 12-25.

Nguyen, H. T. B. (2009). Second language reading strategies: Evidence from Viatnamese learners of English. (Unpublished master thesis). Southern Illinois University Carbondale.

Oxford, R. L. & Burry-Stock, J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). System, 23(1

), 1-23.

Qian, D. D. (1999). Assessing the roles of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(2), 282-308.

Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language learning, 52(3), 513-536.

Rastakhiz, M. & Safari, M. R. (2014). The relationship between global reading strategies and support reading strategies on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ reading comprehension ability. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Science, 4(4), 491-503.

Reutzel, D. R. & Cooter, R. B. (2013). The essentials of teaching children to read: What every teacher should know! Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall Publishing Company.

Rumelhart, D. (1977). Towards an interactive model of reading. In S. Domic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp 573-603). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the vocabulary levels test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55-88.

Shang, H. F. (2010). Reading strategy use, self-efficacy and EFL reading comprehension. Asian EFL Journal, 12(2), 18-40.

Shen, M. Y. (2008). EFL learners’ responses to extensive reading: Survey and pedagogical implications. The Reading Matrix, 8(2), 111-123.

Sidek, H. M. (2009). Reading attitudes: A case study in Malaysia. In Shafaei, A. & M. Nejati (Eds.), Annals of language teaching (pp. 209-215). Boca Raton, Florida: Universal-Publishers.

Soodeh, H. M., Zaidah, Z., & Mahsa, G. (2012). A review on the important role of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 66(1), 555-563.

Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Towards an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(1), 32-71.

Sweet, A. P. & Snow, C. E. (2003). Rethinking reading comprehension. New York: Guilford Press.

Tobing, I. R. A. (2013). The relationship of reading strategies and self-efficacy with the reading comprehension of high school students in Indonesia. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas.

Zhang, L. J. & Anual, S. B. (2008). The role of vocabulary in reading comprehension: The case of secondary school students learning English in Singapore. RELC Journal, 39(1), 51-76.

Zhang, L. J. & Wu, A. (2009). Chinese senior high school EFL students’ problem solving awareness and reading strategy use. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(1), 37-59.

Zuhana, M. Z., Wong, B. E., & Shaneem, R. -G. (2014). Critical reading ability and its relation to L2 proficiency of Malaysian ESL learners. 3L: Language Linguistics Literature, Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 20(2), 43-54.


  • There are currently no refbacks.