Reading Comprehension in First-Year University Students: Insights From the DIALECT Study in Costa Rica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.30-2.21712Keywords:
Reading comprehension, Higher education, Reading diagnosis, College studentsAbstract
Objective. Reading comprehension skills are key in higher education for acquiring complex knowledge. This study explores these skills and their predictive factors among first-year university students and identifies gaps between the texts used in first-year courses and students’ reading comprehension levels. Methodology. A total of 689 first-year university students (age: m = 19.27 years; SD = 3.30) were assessed using DIALECT, an adaptive digital test designed to diagnose reading comprehension skills. A Rasch model analysis was conducted to explore the reliability and technical quality of DIALECT. A descriptive analysis was carried out to characterize the sample, along with group comparisons using non-parametric tests when appropriate. A multiple regression model was used to assess the relationship between predictor variables and test scores. Findings. At the Main Campus, only 14% reached a satisfactory level, compared to 6.3% at the Regional Campuses. The average reading comprehension level was at least 95L below the complexity of the assigned texts, except at the Sarapiquí Campus. School background and reading self-efficacy were the main predictors. Implications. These findings emphasize the necessity of targeted pedagogical interventions, such as diagnostic assessment and leveling, text selection according to students’ reading comprehension levels, and the implementation of scaffolding strategies.
Downloads
References
Andreola, C., Mascheretti, S., Belotti, R., Ogliari, A., Marino, C., Battaglia, M., & Scaini, S. (2021). The heritability of reading and reading-related neurocognitive components: A multi-level meta-analysis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 121, 175-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.11.016
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt.
Bond, T. G. & Fox, C. M. (2013). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Psychology Press.
Bu, Y. & Chen, F. (2023). What key contextual factors contribute to students’ reading literacy among top-performing countries and economies? Statistical and machine learning analyses. International Journal of Educational Research, 122, Article 102267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2023.102267
Colegium, & Universidad de los Andes. (s. f.). DIA+: Diagnóstico oportuno para aprendizaje de calidad. https://diamas.cl/
de-la-Peña, C. & Luque-Rojas, M. J. (2021). Levels of reading comprehension in higher education: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712901
Desa, G., Howard, P. J., Gorzycki, M., & Allen, D. D. (2020). Essential but Invisible: Collegiate Academic Reading Explored from the Faculty Perspective. College Teaching, 68(3), 126-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2020.1766406
García Santamaría, C. & Román Forastelli, M. (2023). Perfil de la reprobación en las universidades públicas en Costa Rica. CONARE-PEN. https://repositorio.conare.ac.cr/server/api/core/bitstreams/1863183e-b0b5-444b-a4f5-506c2131ac53/content
Gorzycki, M., Desa, G., Howard, P. J., & Allen, D. D. (2020). “Reading is important,” but “I don’t read”: Undergraduates’ Experiences with academic reading. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63(5), 499-508. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1020
Griffin, R. A. (2023). A comprehensive literacy approach: Integrating the science and art of reading for adolescents. Literacy Practice & Research, 48(2), 1-31. https://digitalscholarship.fiu.edu/record/19822?ln=en
Guthrie, J. T. & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. En M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403-422). Lawrence Eribaum Associates.
Habók, A., Magyar, A., Németh, M. B., & Csapó, B. (2020). Motivation and self-related beliefs as predictors of academic achievement in reading and mathematics: Structural equation models of longitudinal data. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101634
He, X. (2024). Enhancing reading comprehension with aI-generated adaptive texts. International Journal of New Developments in Education, 6(7), 46-52. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJNDE.2024.060708
Howard, P. J., Gorzycki, M., Desa, G., & Allen, D. D. (2018). Academic reading: Comparing students’ and faculty perceptions of its value, practice, and pedagogy. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 48(3), 189-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2018.1472942
Linacre, M. (2002). Winsteps® Rasch measurement computer program [Computer software]. Winsteps.com
MetaMetrics, Inc. (s. f.). Lexile Text Analyzer. The Lexile & Quantile Hub. https://hub.lexile.com/text-analyzer/
MetaMetrics. (2019). Dialect Assessment System development and technical guide. MetaMetrics, Inc.
Ntereke, B. B. & Ramoroka, B. T. (2017). Reading competency of first-year undergraduate students at University of Botswana: A case study. Reading & Writing, 8(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.4102/rw.v8i1.123
OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT (versión de julio de 2025) [Modelo de lenguaje]. https://chat.openai.com/
Orellana, P. & Melo, C. (2015). Dialect: Integrating technology and reading assessment to diagnose spanish reading difficulties. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 16(1), 37-66. https://literacyandtechnology.org/past-editions/2015-2/volume-16-number-1-may-2015/
Orellana, P., Silva, M., & Iglesias, V. (2024). Students’ reading comprehension level and reading demands in teacher education programs: The elephant in the room? Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1324055
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2019a). PISA 2018 results. What students know and can do (Volume I). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2019b). PISA 2018 results. What school life means for students’ lives (Volume III). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
Programa Estado de la Nación (PEN) (2019). Séptimo informe estado de la educación. CONARE. https://estadonacion.or.cr/?informes=informe-estado-de-la-educacion-2019
Programa Estado de la Nación (PEN) (2021). Octavo estado de la educación. En Programa Estado de la Nación. CONARE-PEN.
Programa Estado de la Nación (PEN) (2023). Noveno estado de la educación. CONARE-PEN. https://repositorio.conare.ac.cr/items/72ce1669-e0b5-48f5-8581-c93a0cd9b76b
Rojas, S. & Montero, E. (2012). El modelo de Rasch: Una herramienta esencial para la evaluación educativa de gran escala. PEN. https://repositorio.conare.ac.cr/server/api/core/bitstreams/40c056af-acac-4f10-8f9a-6071a69b842b/content
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 207-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133
Schunk, D. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Pearson. https://books.google.co.cr/books?id=FZq4cQAACAAJ
Stenner, A. J., Burdick, H., Sanford, E. E., & Burdick, D. S. (2006). How accurate are lexile text measures? Journal of Applied Measurement, 7(3), 307-322. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6976235_How_accurate_are_Lexile_text_measures
Stenner, A. J., Sanford-Moore, E., & Williamson, G. L. (2012). The Lexile® Framework for Reading quantifies the reading ability needed for “college & career readiness”. MetaMetrics.
Villanueva, J. M. (2022). Language profile, metacognitive reading strategies, and reading comprehension performance among college students. Cogent Education, 9(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2061683
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Williamson, G. L., Fitzgerald, J., & Stenner, A. J. (2014). Student reading growth illuminates the Common Core text-complexity standard: Raising both bars. The Elementary School Journal, 115(2), 230-254. https://doi.org/10.1086/678295
Zamora-Araya, J. A., Smith-Castro, V., Montero-Rojas, E., & Moreira-Mora, T. E. (2018). Advantages of the rasch model for analysis and interpretation of attitudes: The case of the benevolent sexism subscale. Revista Evaluar, 18(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.35670/1667-4545.v18.n3.22201
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mauricio Molinari-Ulate, Eiliana Montero-Rojas, Luis Diego Conejo-Bolaños, María Roxana Rodríguez-Araya
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
1. In case the submitted paper is accepted for publication, the author(s) FREELY, COSTLESS, EXCLUSIVELY AND FOR AN INDEFINITE TERM transfer copyrights and patrimonial rights to Universidad Nacional (UNA, Costa Rica). For more details check the Originality Statement and Copyright Transfer Agreement
2. REUTILIZATION RIGHTS: UNA authorizes authors to use, for any purpose (among them selfarchiving or autoarchiving) and to publish in the Internet in any electronic site, the paper´'s final version, both approved and published (post print), as long as it is done with a non commercial purpose, does not generate derivates without previous consentment and recognizes both publisher's name and authorship.
3. The submission and possible publication of the paper in the Educare Electronic Journal is ruled by the Journal’s editorial policies, the institutional rules of Universidad Nacional and the laws of the Republic of Costa Rica. Additionally, any possible difference of opinion or future dispute shall be settled in accordance with the mechanisms of Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Costa Rican Jurisdiction.
4. In all cases, it is understood that the opinions issued are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position and opinion of Educare, CIDE or Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica. It is also understood that, in the exercise of academic freedom, the authors have carried out a rogorous scientific-academic process of research, reflection and argumentation thar lays within the thematic scope of interest of the Journal.
5. The papers published by Educare Electronic Journal use a Creative Commons License:
The articles published by Educare Electronic Journal can be shared with a Creative Commons License: 
