The role of meta‐cognitive cues on the comprehension of proficient and poor readers

We explored whether performance differences exist between proficient and poor readers on implicit text information. Next, we explored whether indices of meta‐cognitive monitoring predicted reading performance. Finally, we examined whether poor and proficient readers exhibited distinct meta‐cognitive profiles with respect to reading comprehension ability. Chilean undergraduate students (N = 146) completed a task on inconsistency detection within texts and a standardised reading comprehension performance measure, which we used, along with confidence in performance judgements, to calculate meta‐cognitive monitoring accuracy. Our results confirmed that proficient readers outperformed poor readers on nearly all measures of interest, except global retrospective meta‐cognitive monitoring judgements, and that proficient readers performed significantly better on items related to implicit information of texts than poor readers. Additionally, when combined in a single group, number of inconsistencies correctly detected and repaired and accurate global evaluation of learning judgements significantly predicted reading performance whereas retrospective global and local meta‐cognitive monitoring judgements did not. Of special significance to our investigation, when separated in two groups, poor and proficient readers exhibited unique meta‐cognitive profiles. Proficient and poor readers employ different meta‐cognitive strategies, and poor readers benefit more from strategies than proficient readers. Highlights What is already known about this topic Meta‐comprehension accuracy among learners is poor. Readers need to slow processing to develop a clear mental model of texts. Clear mental models of texts allow readers to invoke prior knowledge to fill comprehension gaps. What this paper adds Use of meta‐cognitive cues is effective in aiding reading comprehension. Poor and proficient readers exhibit distinct reading comprehension profiles. Implications for theory, policy or practice Poor readers benefit more from meta‐cognitive cues during reading than proficient readers. Meta‐cognitive cues can be efficiently and effectively taught in classrooms. Meta‐cognitive cues improve reading comprehension, especially for poor readers.