|
Grace Judith Vesga-Bravo[1] |
|
|
María Cristina Gamboa-Mora |
|
|
Nelly Milady López-Rodríguez |
|
|
Adiela
Zapata-Zapata |
|
|
Fernando Hernández López |
Abstract
Different researchers have designed strategies
for strengthening metacognitive skills, generally for specific areas of
knowledge. The goal of this research was to validate a pedagogical innovation
strategy to strengthen metacognitive skills in university students and
determine their perception of the same. Three competencies were appointed:
self-recognition, self-planning, and self-management of knowledge. The strategy
considered three moments: I recognize myself; analysis of the students’
metacognitive skills, I strengthen myself; study strategy planning and I
project myself; monitoring and adjustment. A quantitative methodology was used
with a pre-experimental design with pre-test and post-test with three different
groups. Seventy-five students from 3 universities in Colombia were involved,
one public university and two private who were taking part in three different
courses, one virtual and two in distance mode within the framework of the
health emergency generated by COVID-19. The competencies were assessed through
the Schraw & Dennison (1994) Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) as a
pre-test and post-test and were analyzed through a related-sample T-test. The
perception was determined by a survey. It was evidenced that students
strengthened the three metacognitive skills after the strategy implementation,
the significance tests show this to be true. More than 95% of students pointed
out that the strategy was effective and that favored the understanding of their
learning processes, the organization of their study methods and the constant
self-evaluation on the strengthing of their skills. It
is suggested that the strategy is used in new learning environments to continue
evaluating its effectiveness.
Resumen
Diferentes investigadores han diseñado estrategias para el
fortalecimiento de habilidades metacognitivas, generalmente para áreas
específicas del conocimiento. El objetivo de esta investigación fue validar una
estrategia de innovación pedagógica para fortalecer competencias metacognitivas
en estudiantes universitarios y determinar su percepción sobre la misma. Se
establecieron tres competencias: autorreconocimiento, autoplanificación
y autogestión del conocimiento. La estrategia contempló tres momentos: me
reconozco; análisis de las competencias metacognitivas de los estudiantes, me
fortalezco; planificación de estrategias de estudio, y me proyecto; seguimiento
y ajustes. Se utilizó una metodología cuantitativa con un diseño
pre-experimental con preprueba y posprueba con tres grupos diferentes; participaron
75 estudiantes de tres universidades en Colombia, una pública y dos privadas,
quienes hacían parte de tres cursos diferentes, uno virtual y dos en modalidad
remota en el marco de la emergencia sanitaria generada por la COVID-19. Las
competencias se evaluaron a través del Metacognitive Awareness
Inventory (MAI) a manera de pre-test y post-test y
fueron analizadas mediante una prueba T de muestras relacionadas. La percepción
se determinó a través de una encuesta. Se evidenció que los estudiantes fortalecieron
las tres competencias metacognitivas después de la implementación de la
estrategia, las pruebas de significancia así lo demuestran. Más del 95% de los
estudiantes señalaron que la estrategia fue efectiva y favoreció la comprensión
de sus procesos de aprendizaje, la organización de su plan de estudio y la
autoevaluación constante sobre el fortalecimiento de sus competencias. Se
sugiere que la estrategia sea utilizada en nuevos entornos de aprendizaje para
continuar evaluando su efectividad.
Keywords / Palabras clave
Educational innovations,
skills, evaluation, activity learning, university students,
virtual environment, COVID-19 pandemic, confinement
Innovación
educacional, competencia, evaluación, aprendizaje activo, estudiantes
universitarios, entorno virtual, pandemia COVID-19, confinamiento
Over
time, numerous authors have delved into the study of metacognition. Early
investigations, such as those by Tulving (1969), initially centered on
understanding the mechanics of memory. The term metacognition was coined by
Flavell (1976), who defined it as individuals' knowledge about their cognitive
processes and the control they exercise over them. Costa (1984) associated
metacognition with the capacity to understand what one knows, devise strategies
for processing information, maintain awareness during problem-solving, and
reflect on intellectual functioning. Haller et al. (1988) emphasized
metacognition as individuals' awareness of their cognitive resources and their
ability to regulate and monitor them. Ríos (1990) posited that metacognition
involves knowledge of cognitive strategies for optimal problem-solving,
highlighting the theme of self-regulation. These definitions collectively
describe metacognition as the control and self-regulation of one's knowledge.
Metacognition
plays a crucial role in enhancing critical thinking, aiding problem-solving,
and fostering awareness of learning processes among students (Brooke &
Debra, 2022). Simultaneously, metacognition serves as a reflective process
wherein individuals strive to be conscious of their performance across various
life activities, self-regulating to avoid or identify mistakes, and aiming for
higher quality in their endeavors (Hijarro-Vercher et
al., 2023; Tobón y López, 2009). This multifaceted
concept encompasses cognitive processes (knowing how to know), affective motivational
aspects (knowing how to be), and procedural elements (knowing how to do). As a
result, metacognition is perceived as a process involving both knowledge and
the regulation of action. More recently, Craig et al., (2020) identified four
areas of metacognition: metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive experience,
goals, and actions.
Numerous
studies have been conducted in Higher Education Institutions to encourage
metacognitive experiences among students. These studies focus on real-world
applications of strategies for monitoring, controlling, and assessing cognitive
processes during comprehension and text construction tasks, essential for
learning and professional practice (Aripin &
Rahmat, 2021; Bono et al., 2018; Campo et al., 2016; Maturano et al., 2002;
Meneses et al., 2007; Roldán & Zabaleta, 2017). Some investigations aim to
familiarize students with study strategies constituting metacognitive
knowledge, requiring awareness of the person, the task, and the strategy
involved (Ceniceros & Gutiérrez, 2009; Solórzano-Restrepo &
López-Vargas, 2019; Vuorre & Metcalfe, 2021). others
also involve technological tools that allow a comprehensive training and
promote critical and divergent thinking for problem solving in
order to develop and enhance the professional skills required by
students of today's era (Chou et al., 2023; Zarestky
et al. 2022). Moreover, the education systems' motivation involves promoting
metacognitive skills to enhance academic performance (Alegría & Rivera,
2021; Barandica, 2023; Barría
et al., 2022; Moreno et al., 2022).
For
example, in the realm of metacognitive knowledge, Ceniceros & Gutiérrez
(2009) explored students' awareness of activities or problems, self-knowledge,
appropriate thinking strategies, understanding when to employ them, and how to
relate crucial information to existing knowledge. Their findings highlight the
significance of self-regulation and task control, assessing the need for action
planning, recognizing overlooked aspects, employing precise thought processes,
and exerting effort to understand before solving.
Virtanen
et al., (2014) proposed strategies in Finnish universities to heighten
students' awareness of their learning processes, involving self-assessments,
homework, feedback, learning logs, and tutorials. Their study concluded that
activities incorporating motivational and affective components, coupled with
learning strategies, significantly raise students' awareness of their learning,
contributing substantially to academic performance.
Salgado
et al., (2020) analyzed how the use of newspapers in a Mexican university
triggers metacognition processes, fostering skills in content analysis,
critical and creative thinking, and self-awareness of learning achievements and
areas for improvement.
Roa (2016)
implemented a teaching strategy focusing on individual goals and achievements,
establishing a close relationship between goal setting, metacognitive
processes, and skill qualification. Campo et al., (2016) research indicated a
positive correlation between students' performance levels and metacognitive
knowledge, affirming that metacognitive knowledge is essential for controlling
what is produced, while self-regulation strategies contribute to planning,
execution, and task evaluation. This aligns with Vuorre
and Metcalfe (2021) assertion that an individual's recognition of their
knowledge and limitations facilitates seeking help, enhancing learning in the
metacognitive process.
Arias
et al., (2014) determined in a study across three universities that students
with established goals and achievement motivation exhibit better performance
and greater academic success, irrespective of their learning style.
Solórzano-Restrepo & López-Vargas (2019) analyzed the effects of
metacognitive scaffolding and cognitive style, concluding that scaffolding
significantly enhances planning, monitoring, self-evaluation, and metacognitive
control.
On the
other hand, Jaramillo & Simbaña (2014) report
that students use as metacognitive strategies, the interview or questionnaire,
educational portfolios, summaries, readings, and virtual tools that allow
greater access to information and its dissemination, promote collaborative
work, highlighting the importance of the use of blogs, wikis, chat, virtual
classes, multimedia, and digital whiteboards, which are effective methods for
the teaching-learning process. It is concluded that metacognitive strategies
develop thinking skills such as memorizing, applying, analyzing, understanding,
and creating meaningful learning that leads to problem solving and making
correct decisions. The above coincides with the studies carried out by Desoete (2008), Schellings et
al., (2013), Van Hout-Wolters (2009), Veenman (2013),
who demonstrated with the use of various tasks and strategies a strong
relationship between the components of metacognition and knowledge of the
strategy, which includes understanding and how it can be used.
These
results are consistent with findings presented in other studies, where
strengthening metacognitive skills increases self- efficacy and academic
commitments, which is reflected in improvements in academic performance (Loureiro,
and Gomes, 2023; Taghani & Razavi,
2022; Zhao et al., 2024). However, research such that
Karaoglan (2022) and Gamboa et al. (2023) also notes
that at all levels of education, students face a variety of challenges related
to learning. While it is recognized that multiple factors can influence
learning at any given time, evidence suggests that one of these crucial factors
is a lack of knowledge about how to learn, comprehension problems, lack of
motivation and strategies. In other words, many students do not employ the
appropriate strategies to achieve effective learning.
The previous path shows the
importance of continuing to promote the development of metacognitive skills in
university students, although there is progress, low metacognitive levels are
still evident. This research focused on the creation and validation of a
pedagogical innovation strategy, based on the principle of autonomy that
promotes human development and personal self-realization.
2. Method
Specifically, this study set out to
answer the research questions:
·
What is the effect of implementing the Pedagogical
Innovation Strategy on the development of self-recognition, self-planning, and
self-management of knowledge skills in university students?
·
What is the perception of students about the
Metacognitive Pedagogical Innovation Strategy?
A quantitative methodology was used
with a pre-experimental design with pre-test and post-test (Hernández-Sampieri
& Mendoza, 2018) in three different groups. To answer the first question,
an instrument was applied to each group at the beginning of the semester, the
strategy was implemented, and the instrument was applied again; and to answer
the second, a survey was applied to all participants at the end of the
intervention. The independent variable was the innovation strategy, and the
dependent variable was the metacognitive skills framed in the three established
competencies. These aspects are detailed below.
2.1.
Participants
The strategy was implemented in three
Higher Education Institutions in Colombia, one public institution and two
private institutions, named A, B and C. It had the participation of 75 students
who had previously requested informed consent according to the Law 1581 of 2012
of data protection in Colombia. The Table 1 describes the participants.
Table 1.
Participants
|
Institution |
No.
Men |
No.
Women |
Total |
|
Institution A – group A |
1 |
19 |
20 |
|
Institution
B - group B |
6 |
31 |
37 |
|
Institution C - group C |
1 |
17 |
18 |
|
Total |
8 |
67 |
75 |
The participants in this study were
selected through purposive sampling. The strategy was implemented in the group
with the highest number of students at each participating university,
supervised by one of the researchers during the second semester of 2020. The
decision was influenced by the availability and accessibility of the groups,
and it was taken into account that the sample size in
this type of research does not condition that it can be carried out, as pointed
out by Chou & Feng (2019). These courses were part of different programs
and academic levels, with two being delivered remotely and one virtually
through Hybrid Learning Environments. The delivery modes included synchronous
and asynchronous spaces through MEET and TEAMS platforms, as well as Moodle
virtual classrooms.
2.2.
Instruments
To validate the effectiveness of the
pedagogical innovation strategy in the development of metacognitive skills, the
Metacognitive Awareness Inventory - MAI, created by Schraw & Denninson (1994) and validated for use in Colombia for
Huertas et al., (2014). This instrument has been used in different studies in
Latin America such as Julio (2021), Largo & Hurtado (2024) and De la Portilla-Maya et al., (2022).
This instrument is made up of 52 items,
distributed in two categories: cognition awareness and cognition regulation,
and eight subcategories. These subcategories were associated with the three
established competencies and the MAI was applied before and after the
implementation of the strategy. The MAI is a self-report questionnaire, and its
response options are on a Likert scale that is associated with a quantitative
scale as follows: 1. completely disagree, 2. disagree, 3. neither disagree nor
agree, 4. agree, and 5. completely agree.
To find out the participants'
perception of the strategy, a survey was designed to find out whether they
considered that the strategy had helped them to improve their metacognitive skills
and whether they would use it again. This instrument was validated through
expert judgment.
2.3.
Procedure
The pedagogical innovation strategy created
and validated in this study is based on the principle of autonomy, seeks to
promote human development and personal self-realization, and is aimed at
strengthening three metacognitive competencies. The design was based on the
perspective of the socio-formative approach in which the competences are
understood as integral actions in the face of activities and problems of the
context, with suitability and ethical commitment and they are described, also
from this point of view, considering the components: verb + conceptual object +
purpose + reference condition (García et al., 2009; López, et al.,
2021). Thus, the
metacognitive skills of self-recognition, self-planning and self-management of
knowledge that were proposed are:
·
Self-recognition: identifies study strategies for the
development of their metacognition, showing interest in their learning in an
autonomous manner.
·
Self-planning: proposes an action plan for the
development of metacognition and the construction of new knowledge, considering
activities and resources that have worked and incorporating new ones with a
critical and creative attitude.
·
Knowledge self-management executes the necessary
resources for the development of their metacognition and to achieve learning
goals, self-motivating and overcoming obstacles with responsibility.
To measure
these competencies, in accordance with the conceptualization described above, a correspondence was established with the subcategories of
the MAI so that each one includes aspects of cognition knowledge and cognition
regulation as described in Table 2.
Table 2.
Metacognitive competences and correlation with MAI
|
Competence |
Subcategory MAI |
MAI items |
|
Self-recognition |
Declarative
knowledge (DK) |
5,
10, 12, 16, 17, 20, 32, 46 |
|
Evaluation (RE) |
7, 19, 24, 19, 36, 38, 50 |
|
|
Self-planning |
Procedural
knowledge (PK) |
3,
14, 27, 33 |
|
Planning (RP) |
4, 6, 8, 22, 23 42, 45 |
|
|
Self-management
of knowledge. |
Conditional
knowledge (CK) |
15,
18, 26, 29, 35 |
|
Organization (RO) |
9, 13, 30, 31, 37, 39,
41, 43, 47, 48 |
|
|
Monitoring (RM) |
1,
2, 11, 21, 28, 34, 49 |
|
|
Debugging (RD) |
25, 40, 44, 51, 52 |
Source:
Own elaboration based on MAI
Considering that Azevedo (2020), points
out that metacognitive instruction must meet the following three conditions:
1. Embedding metacognitive instruction in
the content matter to ensure connectivity,
2. Informing learners about the usefulness
of metacognitive activities to make them exert the initial extra effort, and
3. Prolonging training to guarantee the
smooth and maintained application of metacognitive activity (p. 94)
Based on the definition of the three
competencies, the strategy was structured in three moments. In the first,
called I know myself, the participants answer the MAI (pre-test), and using a
worksheet, they analyze their three metacognitive competencies, and identify
strengths and improvement areas; this was carried out during the first week. In
the second moment, I strengthen myself, the participants, based on the analysis
of the results and with the guidance of the teachers, plan and execute
strategies aimed at strengthening their competencies, establish frequency of
follow-up, evaluation, and assessment of effectiveness. This was done through a
resource called the metacognitive log, through which the participants were
asked to monitor the implementation of their strategies following the moments
analyze, plan, execute, evaluate, reinforce, and modify, since metacognition is
a reflective process, and these moments allow the student to know their
thinking processes.
This second moment is the central part
of the strategy and was carried out for approximately 14 weeks. During this
time, teachers motivate students to execute the strategies, and through
self-evaluation rubrics, they formally follow up on the implementation and its
effectiveness every four weeks. Finally, in the third moment, I project myself,
the MAI is applied again (post-test), students compare with their initial
results, reflect on learning achieved and aspects to continue strengthening. It
is recommended that from this, students identify changes and actions needed to
start a new cycle of the metacognitive process.
In each course of each of the three
universities, the corresponding programmatic content was developed, and the
strategy was included through the three moments described. The MAI was applied
at the beginning and end of the semester, and the perception survey at the end
of the semester.
2.4. Data
analysis
To determine whether the use of the
strategy influenced the development of metacognitive competencies, a
T-test for related samples was
performed for each group using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences, version 20). The independent variable was the strategy used and the
dependent variable corresponded to the development of the three metacognitive
competencies that were evaluated through the MAI as described in Table 2. In
the statistical analysis, significant differences were considered to exist if
p< 0.05.
3. Results
Tables 3, 4, and 5 present the T-test
for related samples for each of the three competencies according to the MAI,
for each of the three institutions A, B and C.
Table 3.
T-test for samples samples related University
A
|
|
Related
differences |
T |
gl |
Sig.
(bilateral) p-value |
|||||
|
|
|
(pre-post) |
Standard
deviation |
Standard
error of the average |
95%
Confidence interval for the difference |
||||
|
|
|
Lower |
Upper |
||||||
|
Self-recognition |
DK
pre |
-0.375 |
0.496 |
0.117 |
-0.622 |
-0.128 |
-3.206 |
17 |
0.005 |
|
DK
post |
|||||||||
|
RE
pre |
-0.618 |
0.792 |
0.192 |
-1.025 |
-0.21 |
-3.214 |
16 |
0.005 |
|
|
RE
post |
|||||||||
|
Self-planning |
PK
pre |
-0.583 |
0.549 |
0.129 |
-0.857 |
-0.31 |
-4.507 |
17 |
0.000 |
|
PK
post |
|||||||||
|
RP
pre |
-0.444 |
0.363 |
0.086 |
-0.625 |
-0.264 |
-5.194 |
17 |
0.000 |
|
|
RP
post |
|||||||||
|
Knowledge self-management |
CK
pre |
-0.262 |
0.515 |
0.121 |
-0.518 |
-0.006 |
-2.157 |
17 |
0.046 |
|
CK
post |
|||||||||
|
RO
pre |
-0.4 |
0.445 |
0.105 |
-0.621 |
-0.179 |
-3.817 |
17 |
0.001 |
|
|
RO
post |
|||||||||
|
RM
pre |
-0.525 |
0.415 |
0.098 |
-0.732 |
-0.319 |
-5.373 |
17 |
0.000 |
|
|
RM
post |
|||||||||
|
RD
pre |
-0.335 |
0.606 |
0.143 |
-0.637 |
-0.034 |
-2.346 |
17 |
0.031 |
|
|
RD
post |
|||||||||
In this institution it is observed that
the students presented better skills after implementation in two of the three
competencies. In Self-planning the significance tests show that there were
significant differences in the two subcategories of the MAI (in PK t=-4.507 and
p= 0.00; in RP t=-4.507 and p= 0.00). In the knowledge self-management
competency there were also significant differences in the four subcategories of
the MAI that comprise it (in CK, t=-2.157 and p= 0.046; in RO, t=-3.817and p=
0.001; in RM, t=-5.373 and p= 0.000; in RD, t=-2.346 and p= 0.031).
Table 4
T-test for samples samples related University B
|
|
Related differences |
T |
gl |
Sig.
(bilateral) p-value |
|||||
|
|
|
(pre-post) |
Standard deviation |
Standard error of the average |
95% Confidence interval for the difference |
||||
|
|
|
Lower |
Lower |
||||||
|
Self-recognition |
DK
pre |
-0.625 |
0.561 |
0.092 |
-0.812 |
-0.438 |
-6.782 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
DK
post |
|||||||||
|
RE
pre |
-0.743 |
0.804 |
0.132 |
-1.011 |
-0.475 |
-5.625 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
|
RE
post |
|||||||||
|
Self-planning |
PK
pre |
-0.73 |
0.647 |
0.106 |
-0.945 |
-0.514 |
-6.866 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
PK
post |
|||||||||
|
RP
pre |
-0.691 |
0.583 |
0.096 |
-0.885 |
-0.497 |
-7.214 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
|
RP
post |
|||||||||
|
Knowledge self-management |
CK
pre |
-0.562 |
0.62 |
0.102 |
-0.769 |
-0.356 |
-5.518 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
CK
post |
|||||||||
|
RO
pre |
-0.562 |
0.551 |
0.091 |
-0.746 |
-0.378 |
-6.201 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
|
RO
post |
|||||||||
|
RM
pre |
-0.637 |
0.57 |
0.094 |
-0.827 |
-0.447 |
-6.798 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
|
RM
post |
|||||||||
|
RD
pre |
-0.346 |
0.471 |
0.077 |
-0.503 |
-0.189 |
-4.472 |
36 |
0.000 |
|
|
RD
post |
|||||||||
In this group
there were significant differences in the three competencies defined and
evaluated through the MAI. In the eight subcategories established,
p=0.000<0.05
Table 5
T-test for samples samples related University C
|
|
Related
differences |
T |
gl |
Sig.
(bilateral) p-value |
|||||
|
|
|
(pre-post) |
Standard
deviation |
Standard
error of the average |
95%
Confidence interval for the difference |
||||
|
|
|
Lower |
Lower |
||||||
|
Self-recognition |
DK
pre |
-0.285 |
0.426 |
0.1 |
-0.497 |
-0.073 |
-2.834 |
17 |
0.011 |
|
DK
post |
|||||||||
|
RE
pre |
-0.574 |
0.597 |
0.141 |
-0.871 |
-0.277 |
-4.077 |
17 |
0.001 |
|
|
RE
post |
|||||||||
|
Self-planning |
PK
pre |
-0.5 |
0.575 |
0.136 |
-0.786 |
-0.214 |
-3.688 |
17 |
0.002 |
|
PK
post |
|||||||||
|
RP
pre |
-0.397 |
0.494 |
0.116 |
-0.642 |
-0.151 |
-3.41 |
17 |
0.003 |
|
|
RP
post |
|||||||||
|
Knowledge self-management |
CK
pre |
-0.378 |
0.757 |
0.179 |
-0.754 |
-0.001 |
-2.116 |
17 |
0.049 |
|
CK
post |
|||||||||
|
RO
pre |
-0.4 |
0.51 |
0.12 |
-0.654 |
-0.146 |
-3.328 |
17 |
0.004 |
|
|
RO
post |
|||||||||
|
RM
pre |
-0.333 |
0.525 |
0.124 |
-0.595 |
-0.072 |
-2.691 |
17 |
0.015 |
|
|
RM
post |
|||||||||
|
RD
pre |
-0.144 |
0.531 |
0.125 |
-0.408 |
0.119 |
-1.155 |
17 |
0.264 |
|
|
RD
post |
|||||||||
There
were significant differences in all three competencies, p<0.05, except in
the subcategory RD.
It is observed that the students of the
three universities strengthened the three metacognitive competencies after the
implementation of the strategy, as shown by the significance tests. Figure 1
shows that the students' averages in the three defined competencies were higher
after the implementation of the strategy, which corroborates that the
differences are in favor of the post-implementation results.
Figure 1. Average scores in the three competencies
before and after the implementation of the Pedagogical innovation strategy
In self-recognition, students in
institution A went from an average of 3.7 to 4.0; in institution B from 3.8 to
4.5; and in institution C, from 4.0 to 4.5. This competency groups the
metacognition subcomponents of declarative knowledge and evaluation, and it was
shown that the differences in favor of the intervention were statistically
significant in each institution. In the self-planning competency, statistically
significant differences were also observed after the use of the pedagogical
innovation strategy, the averages went from 3.8 to 4.5; from 3.9 to 4.6 and
from 4.1 to 4.6 in institutions A, B and C respectively. This competency groups
the MAI subcomponents of procedural knowledge and planning and in each the
T-test showed that the differences were significant in favor of the use of the
strategy. In the third competency, self-management of knowledge, which groups
the MAI subcategories of conditional knowledge, organization, monitoring, and
evaluation, there were also statistically significant differences in favor of
the use of the strategy, in this competency the averages went from 4.0 to 4.5
in institution A, from 4.1 to 4.6 in institution B, and from 4.2 to 4.6 in
institution C.
Regarding the students' perception, 97%
considered that the strategy was effective. When asked to argue their response,
they indicated that the strategy helped them to adequately organize study time,
draw up a study plan, set learning goals, use different study strategies such
as summaries, mind maps, concept maps, organize their previous knowledge and
articulate it with what they learned, identify weaknesses and strengths, apply
strategies in other subjects, which allowed them to obtain successful results,
evidenced in their final course grades.
Regarding the students' perception, 97%
considered that the strategy was effective. When asked to argue their response,
they indicated that the strategy helped them to adequately organize study time,
draw up a study plan, set learning goals, use different study strategies such
as summaries, mind maps, concept maps, organize their previous knowledge and
articulate it with what they learned, identify weaknesses and strengths, apply
strategies in other subjects, which allowed them to obtain successful results,
evidenced in their final course grades.
Additionally, 99% stated that they
would continue to use metacognitive strategies in their daily lives. This
result shows that the strategies employed probably had a positive impact on the
students' learning and, therefore, allowed them to improve their academic
performance. The participants expressed having strengthened their skills, which
is consistent with the results of the Mai applied at the beginning of the
semester and the results obtained at the end of the course. Among the strategies
used, the following stand out: preparation of glossaries, key words, summaries,
use of the calendar, organization of assignments by due date, concept maps,
reviewing content, making diagrams and constant self-evaluation. It can be
stated that the students had a very good perception of the strategy
implemented.
4. Discussion
The objective of this study was to
validate the Pedagogical innovation strategy for the development of
metacognitive competencies in university students. Specifically, it focused on
strengthening three competencies: self-recognition, self-planning and
self-management of knowledge, defined in the framework of this research. The
results show that there were significant differences in the development of
these competencies in the participants of the three universities after the
implementation of the strategy. These results are similar to those of other
studies that have shown that the use of different strategies and activities
generates a strong relationship of the components of metacognition and strategy
knowledge which favors the learning process which is reflected in academic
performance (Desoete, 2008; Satrústegui
et al., 2024; Schellings et al., 2013; Van
Hout-Wolters, 2009; Veenman, 2013; Virtanen et al.,
2014).
The first moment of the strategy, I
recognize myself, allowed students to do a self-assessment exercise of their
metacognitive skills using the MAI while reflecting on their learning goals in
each of the courses they were enrolled in. This moment is framed in the
proposal of different researchers regarding the importance of students
recognizing what they know and what they do not know, to know when to seek help
and thus favor learning about the metacognitive process and face new situations
(Dennis & Somerville, 2023; Vuorre &
Metcalfe, 2021). This stage also favors the
development of metacognitive judgment, an aspect recommended by different
researchers (Montoya et al., 2021).
In the second moment, I strengthen
myself, the students proposed strategies that would allow them to improve their
metacognitive competencies. Although the teachers made some general suggestions
about possible strategies, each student had to propose his or her own, the
frequency of follow-up and, in a permanent monitoring exercise, determine
whether or not they were working for him or her. .
Other studies with university students aimed at increasing students'
metacognitive awareness have used strategies such as self-assessments,
homework, feedback, student learning journals, tutorials, and digital
narratives, demonstrating that they can be an efficient strategy for the
development of metacognitive skills (Virtanen et al., 2014; Lavrysh
et al., 2023)
This type of strategies was identified
in what the participants proposed, and it was possible to verify, as Virtanen
et al., (2014) point out, the positive of combining activities and learning
strategies to increase the students' awareness of their process. This aspect
responds to the recommendations of other studies such as Mora-Rosales et al.,
(2023), who state that students can use strategies to plan their time,
prioritize activities, and monitor and evaluate their own learning performance.
The metacognitive register, used for this second moment, allowed students a
process of permanent reflection on their learning.
Also in this second stage, the use of
rubrics was included for students to self-evaluate what was planned, its
execution and follow-up to improve the metacognitive competencies of
self-recognition, self-planning, and self-management of knowledge. This allowed,
by students to increase their commitment and responsibility in the selection of
strategies, and teachers to promote self-evaluation and reflection in the
learning process (McMillán & Hearn, 2008;
Zimmerman, 2000; Panadero & Alonso-Tapia, 2013). On the other hand, the use
of self-assessment rubrics allowed students to monitor their own activity,
reducing subjectivity as suggested by García-Sanz (2014) and Krebs (2022).
Finally, the third moment of the Pedagogical
innovation strategy project allowed students, using the MAI, to analyze and
compare the development of their metacognitive competencies before and after
having implemented the strategy in order to make new
changes aimed at advancing their level of performance. Also at this time, using the worksheet,
students reflected on the level of achievement reached against the expectations
and learning challenges proposed at the beginning of the course. Incorporating
different metacognitive strategies together with instruments to measure
metacognition, contributes to achieve the improvement of learning processes
through the metacognitive awareness that we seek to forge in students as
suggested by Zapata-Zapata & Vesga-Bravo (2023a).
This study showed that these proposed
moments and the resources used had positive effects on the development of the
three metacognitive competencies, As shown in figure 1.
The validation of the Pedagogical
innovation strategy in three courses of different academic programs, from
different institutions, developed in virtual and remote modality, allows
offering to the educational community a pedagogical strategy that favors the
development of metacognitive competences of self-recognition, self-planning,
and self-management of knowledge in university students. This strategy can be
implemented in all formative levels and fields of higher education for the
development of students' metacognitive competencies in different learning situations
since it is not limited to a specific field of knowledge (Greene et al., 2015; Kleitman & Narciss, 2019).
The articulation between the
metacognitive competences of self-recognition, self-planning and
self-management and the MAI, provide university students with a methodological
proposal that is easy to understand and apply in their learning process,
according to their tastes and needs, in a flexible and adaptive manner that in
the perspective of the socio-formative approach contributes to comprehensive
training, in relation to their ethical life project and suitable performance in
different contexts, as it strengthens self-criticism, autonomy and
responsibility.
The implementation of strategy allowed
validating the resources created for its development (worksheet, metacognitive
log and self-assessment rubrics) as well as the relevance of the adoption of
the MAI and its articulation with the established competencies. From the point
of view of the research teachers, the relevance of these resources was observed
in the way students easily and adequately made use of each resource as
appropriate in the three moments of the process "I recognize myself",
"I strengthen myself" and "I project myself", for
reflection on their metacognitive processes.
The results of the application of the
MAI at the beginning and at the end of the process show a higher level of
performance in the metacognitive competencies of self-recognition, self-planning,
and self-management, after implementation. The students' perception of the
effectiveness of the strategy (97%) and their interest in continuing to
implement it autonomously (98%) confirm the pedagogical nature of the pedagogical
innovation strategy.
5. Conclusions
The validation of the strategy allows
us to present it to the university community, for its implementation by
teachers and students in the academic spaces of their training or autonomously,
with the certainty that it will contribute to the development of their
metacognitive competencies of self-recognition, self-planning, and
self-management. Although the study was carried out in three different
universities, with students from various training programs, the total number of
participants can be considered low, so it is desirable that other studies use
the Pedagogical innovation strategy with a larger number of students and thus
obtain new data on its effectiveness in the development of metacognitive
competencies.
This research opens the way for new
studies in the field of metacognition and learning in search of pedagogical and
didactic strategies that enhance self-recognition and autonomy in learning,
aimed at finding new ways of learning at different levels of education. New
studies can use or adapted the Pedagogical innovation strategy for the
development of competencies in elementary and middle school students. It is
also desirable to analyze the effect of the strategy through correlation
studies, for example with academic achievement, motivation, development of
critical thinking, among others.
CRedIT
Grace Judith Vesga-Bravo: Conceptualization, Methodology; Data
curation, Formal Analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review
& editing, Project Administration. María Cristina Gamboa-Mora; Conceptualization,
Investigation and Data curation, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing
– review & editing. Nelly Milady López-Rodríguez. Conceptualization,
Investigation and Data curation, Supervision, Writing – original draft. Adiela Zapata-Zapata; Fernando Hernández López:
Conceptualization, Investigation and Data curation, Supervision, Writing –
original draft.
Funding
To Universidad
Antonio Nariño University, Universidad Autónoma de
Bucaramanga University and National Open and Distance University of Colombia,
for their support to the research management of their faculty through the
inter-institutional project 2020011 entitled Pedagogical innovation strategy
for the development of metacognitive skills in university students, which was
developed based on a cooperation agreement.
References
Alegría V. R., & Rivera M, J.
(2021). Metacognición y competencias en la carrera de arquitectura de una
universidad privada de Lima, Perú. [Metacognition and
competenciesin the architecture career of aprivate university
in lima-peru] Revista de Ciencias Sociales y
Humanidades Chakiñan, 13, 55-71. https://doi.org/10.37135/chk.002.13.03
Arias,
W.L, Zegarra, J., & Justo., O. (2014). Estilos de aprendizaje y metacognición en
estudiantes de psicología de Arequipa [Learning and metacognition styles
in psychology students from Arequipa]. Liberabit. Revista
Peruana de Psicología, 20(2), 267-279. https://bit.ly/3UsEfvP
Aripin, N., & Rahmat, N. H. (2020). Metacognitive
Writing Strategies Model Used by ESL Writers in the Writing Process: A Study
Across Gender. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 11(1),
1–9. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.1.2021.111.1.9
Azevedo,
R. (2020). Reflections on the field of metacognition: issues, challenges, and
opportunities. Metacognition Learning 15, 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09231-x
Barandica Sabalza, E. E. (2023). Estrategias metacognitivas y pensamiento
crítico en el aprendizaje del inglés: una revisión sistemática en las bases de Scopus, Dialnet y Redalyc. [Metacognitive
strategies and critical thinking in efl learning: a
systematic review based in Scopus, Dialnet and Redalyc]
Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar,
7(2), 857-876. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i2.5371
Barría, V,
Martínez, R, & Robledo, H. (2022). Estilos de aprendizaje y metacognición
en la Práctica Profesional. [Learning styles and metacognition in the Professional
Practice of students]. Praxis & Saber, 13(35), e14460. https://doi.org/10.19053/22160159.v13.n35.2022.14460
Bono, A., Boatto, E.,
Aguilera, S., & Fenoglio, C. (2018). Tareas de
clase de gestión metacognitiva. Una propuesta de intervención pedagógica en el
aula universitaria [Metacognitive-oriented assignments. [A proposal for pedagogic intervention in the university classroom]. Innovación
educativa, 18(78), 143-170. https://bit.ly/3Skh2Js
Brooke,
R., & Debra, Z. (2022) Teaching Conceptual Models: Using Direct
Instruction To Enhance Metacognition. Marketing Education Review, 32(4), 311-328.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2022.2059686
Campo, K., Escorcia, D., Moreno, M., &
Palacio., J. (2016). Metacognición, escritura y rendimiento académico en
universitarios de Colombia y Francia [Metacognition, writing
and academic performance in colombian
and french college students]. Avances en Psicología
Latinoamericana, 32(2), 233-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.12804/apl34.2.2016.03
Ceniceros, D., & Gutiérrez, D. (2009). Las
habilidades metacognitivas en los estudiantes de la Universidad De Durango [The
Metacognitive skills in the
students of the pedagogical university of durango]. Psicogente, 12(21), 29-37.
https://doi.org/10.17081/psico.12.21.1184
Chou P-N,
Feng S-T. Using a Tablet Computer Application to Advance High School Students’
Laboratory Learning Experiences: A Focus on Electrical Engineering
Education. Sustainability. 2019; 11(2):381.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020381
Chou, C. M.,
Shen, T. C., Shen, T. C., & Shen, C. H. (2023). The impact of CIE education
integrated with the BIG 6 teaching strategy on students’ innovative motivation,
creativity, metacognition, and self-perceived employability. Thinking Skills
and Creativity, 48, Article 101287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101287.
Costa, A. (1984). Mediating
the Metacognitive. Educational Leadership,
42(3), 57-62. https://bit.ly/42pWjsb
Craig, K., Hale, D.,
Grainger, C. & Stewart. M.E. (2020). Evaluating metacognitive self-reports:
systematic reviews of the value of self-report in metacognitive research. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 155–213.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09222-y
De la Portilla-Maya, S. R.,
Duque-Dussán, A. M., Landínez-Martínez,
D. A., Montoya-Londoño, D. M. y Gutiérrez DeBlume, A.
P. (2022). Pensamiento crítico y conciencia metacognitiva en una muestra de
estudiantes de Medicina. [Critical thinking and metacognitive
awareness in a sample of medical students]. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos, 18(1), 145-168. https://doi.org/10.17151/rlee.2022.18.1.8
Dennis, J. L., & Somerville, M. P. (2023). Supporting thinking about
thinking: examining the metacognition theory-practice gap in higher education. Higher
Education, 86(1), 99-117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00904-x
Desoete, A. (2008). Multi-method
assessment of metacognitive skills in elementary school children: how you test
is what you get. Metacognition and learning, 3, 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9026-0
Flavell, J. (1976). Metacognitive Aspects of Problem
Solving. En
L. B. Resnick (Ed.) The Nature
of Intelligence. Erlbaum.
Gamboa Mora, M. C., López-Rodríguez, N.
M., Vesga-Bravo, G. J., & Hernández-López, F. (2023). Metacognitive skills of undergraduate
university students: study based on three colombian
institutions. Psicogente, 26(50). https://doi.org/10.17081/psico.26.50.6162
García-Sanz, M. P. (2014).
La evaluación de competencias en Educación Superior mediante rúbricas: un caso
práctico. [Assessing
competencies in higher education by rubrics: a case study]. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación
del Profesorado, 17(1), 87-106. https://bit.ly/48dHSch
García, J., Tobón, S., & López, N.
(2009). Currículo, didáctica y evaluación por competencias. Análisis desde
el enfoque socioformativo [Curriculum, didactics and evaluation by competencies. Analysis from the socioformative
approach]. Editorial
UNIMET.
Greene, J. A., Bolick, C.
M., Jackson, W. P., Caprino, A. M., Oswald, C., & McVea, M. (2015).
Domain-specificity of self-regulated learning processing in science and history
digital libraries. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42,
111–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.06.001
Haller, E., Child, D., & Walberg, H. (1988). Can
Comprehension Be Taught? A Quantitative Synthesis of "Metacognitive"
Studies. Educational Researcher,
17(9),
5-8. https://doi.org/10.2307/1175040
Hernandez-Sampieri
y Mendoza (2018). Metodología de la investigación. Las rutas
cuantitativa, cualitativa y
mixta. [Research methodology. Quantitative,
qualitative and mixed routes] Macgraw Hill.
Hijarro-Vercher, A., Solaz-Portolés, J. J., & Sanjosé López, V. (2023).
Creatividad, metacognición y autoeficacia en la detección de errores en
problemas resueltos. [Creativity, metacognition and
self-efficacy in detecting errors in solved problems] Revista
Fuentes, 25(3), 256–266. https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.2023.23050
Huertas,
A., Vesga, G., & Galindo, M. (2014). Validación del instrumento
‘Inventario de Habilidades Metacognitivas (MAI)’ con estudiantes colombianos. [Validation of the
instrument ‘Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI)’with students in colombia]. Praxis & Saber, 5(10), 55 - 74. https://doi.org/10.19053/22160159.3022
Jaramillo, L.M., & Simbaña, V.P. (2014). La
metacognición y su aplicación en herramientas virtuales desde la práctica
docente. [Metacognition
and its application in virtual tools from teaching practice]. Sophia, Colección de Filosofía de
la Educación, 16, 299-313. https://bit.ly/491JdUM
Julio, J. N. (2021).
Andamiaje metacognitivo en ambientes virtuales de aprendizaje como estrategia
para mejorar el rendimiento frente a logros de aprendizaje
científico-tecnológicos y la autopercepción de habilidades metacognitivas en la
ruralidad. [Metacognitive
scaffolding in virtual learning environments as a strategy to improve
performance in scientific-technological learning achievements and
self-perception of metacognitive skills in rural areas. [Specialization thesis
in information technologies applied to education, National Pedagogical
University]. https://bit.ly/3HFD44l.
Karaoglan, F. G. (2022). The effect of learning analytics assisted
recommendations and guidance feedback on students’ metacognitive awareness and
academic achievements. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 34(2),
396-415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09304-z
Kleitman, S., & Narciss, S. (2019). Introduction to the special issue
“applied metacognition: real-world applications beyond learning”. Metacognition
and Learning, 14, 335–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-019-09214-7
Krebs, R., Rothstein, B.,
& Roelle, J. (2022). Rubrics enhance accuracy and
reduce cognitive load in self-assessment. Metacognition and Learning, 17(2),
627-650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09302-1
Largo Taborda, W. A., & Hurtado Vinasco, K. S.
(2024). Fortalecimiento
de la capacidad de autorregulación metacognitiva mediante el uso de la guía de
interaprendizaje desde el cuidado del medio ambiente. [Strengthening the capacity
for metacognitive self-regulation through the use of
the interlearning guide for environmental care]. Praxis Pedagógica, 24(36), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.26620/uniminuto.praxis.24.36.2024.6–2
Lavrysh, Y, Leshchenko, M, Tymchuk, L. (2023). Development of
Metacognitive Skills through Digital Narrativesin
Higher Education. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 25,
e07, 1-15. https://redie.uabc.mx/redie/article/view/5028
López, R., Tobón, S.,
Veytia, M. G., & Juárez, L. G. (2021). La mediación didáctica
socioformativa en el aula que favorece la inclusión educativa. [Socio-formative didactic mediation in the
classroom that favors educational inclusion]. Revista Fuentes, 23(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.2021.v23.i1.11203
Loureiro, P., & Gomes,
M. J. (2023). Online
peer assessment for learning: findings from higher education students. Education Sciences, 13(3), 253. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13030253
Maturano, C., Soliveres,
M., & Macías, A. (2002). Estrategias
cognitivas y metacognitivas en la comprensión de un texto de ciencias
[Cognitive and metacognitive strategies in the comprehension of a science text]
Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 20(3), 415-425. https://bit.ly/3Os1T7D
Mc Millan, J., & Hearn, J. (2008). Student
self-assessment: The key to stronger student motivation. Educational Horizons, 87(1), 40-49. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/42jaNu3
Meneses, L., Salvador, F., & Ravelo, E. (2007).
Descripción de los procesos cognitivos implicados en la escritura de un ensayo. [Description of the cognitive processes
involved in writing an essay]. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 10(1), 83-98. https://bit.ly/3OlkpPe
Montoya, D. M., Orrego, M., Puente, A. y Tamayo, O.
E. (2021). Los juicios metacognitivos como un campo
emergente de investigación. Una
revisión sistemática
(2016-2020). [Metacognitive judgments as an emerging research field. A systematic review (2016-2020)]. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios
Educativos, 17(1), 188-223. https://doi.org/10.17151/rlee.2021.17.1.10
Mora-Rosales, J. C.,
Ávila-Fray, D. X., & Gómez-Gaibor, A. S. (2023). Estrategias metacognitivas
para aprendizajes significativos en el contexto universitario: una revisión
sistemática. [Metacognitive strategies for significant learning in
the university context: a systematic review]. Revista Científica Multidisciplinaria
Arbitrada Yachasun 7(12 Ed. esp.), 29–52. https://doi.org/10.46296/yc.v7i12edespjun.0331
Moreno, J. Arbulú, C.
Montenegro, L. (2022). La metacognición como factor de desarrollo de
competencias en la educación peruana. [Metacognition
for Skills Development in Peruvian Education].
Revista Educación, vol. 46,
núm.1 pp. 1-29. https://doi.org/10.15517/revedu.v46i1.43724
Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J.
(2014). How
do students self-regulate? Review of Zimmerman‟s
cyclical modelof self-regulatedlearning.
Anales de Psicología,
30(2), 450-462.
https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.2.167221
Ríos, P. (1990). Relación entre Metacognición y
Ejecución en Sujetos de Diferentes Edades. [Relationship between
metacognition and performance in subjects of different ages]. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Central University of Venezuela. https://bit.ly/42nKXoB
Roa, H. (2016). Estrategias creativas y
metacognitivas en el aprendizaje musical [Creative and metacognitive strategies in learning music]. Civilizar.
Ciencias Sociales y Humanas, 16 (30), 207-222. https://bit.ly/3upUn6p
Roldán, L., & Zabaleta, V. (2017). Desempeño y
autopercepción en comprensión lectora en estudiantes universitarios [Performance and Self-Perception in
Reading Comprehension among
College Students]. Cuadernos de Investigación Educativa, 8(1), 77-96. https://doi.org/10.18861/cied.2017.8.1.2640
Salgado., A., García, L., & Méndez-Cadena, M.E.
(2020). La experiencia del estudiantado mediante el uso del diario. ¿Una estrategia
para la metacognición? [Student experience through
journaling: a strategy for metacognition?] Revista Educación, 44(1),1-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.15517/REVEDU.V44I1.38291
Satrústegui,
A., Quílez, A., Mateo, E., & Cortés-Pascual, A.
(2024). Estrategias de aprendizaje y rendimiento académico en materias STEM en
Educación Secundaria. [Learning
strategies and academic performance in STEM subjects in secondary education].
Revista Fuentes, 26(1), 36–47.
https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.2024.23324
Schellings, G., Van Hout-Wolters,
B.H.A.M., Veenman, M., & Meijer, J. (2013). Assessing
metacognitive activities: the in-depth comparison of a task-specific
questionnaire with think-aloud protocols. European Journal of Psychology of
Education, 28, 963–990 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0149-y
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. (1994).
Assessing Metacognitive Awareness. Contemporary
Educational Psychology,19(4), 460-475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
Solórzano-Restrepo,
J., &López-Vargas, O. (2019). Efecto diferencial de un andamiaje metacognitivo en un ambiente e-learning sobre la
carga cognitiva, el logro de aprendizaje y la habilidad metacognitiva [Differential effect of a
metacognitive scaffolding in a e-Learning environment over cognitive load,
learning achievement and metacognitive consciousness].
Suma Psicológica, 26(1),
37-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2019.v26.n1.5
Taghani, A., &
Razavi, M. R. (2022). The effect of
metacognitive skills training of study strategies on academic self-efficacy and
academic engagement and performance of female students in Taybad.
Current Psychology, 41(12), 8784-8792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01278-y
Tobón, S., y López, N. (2009). Estrategias metacognitivas. [Metacognitive strategies].
En García J y Tobón (Coord). Estrategias
didácticas para la formación de competencias. A.R. Representaciones
Generales S.R.L.
Tulving, E. (1969). Retrograde
amnesia in free recall. Science, 164(3875), 88-90. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.164.3875.88
Van Hout-Wolters, B.A. H.
M. (2009). Measuring learning strategies. Kinds of measurement methods and
their usefulness in educational research and practice. Pedagogische Studiën,
86(2),
110-129. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287836768
Veenman, M. V. J. (2013). International handbook of
metacognition and learning technologies. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition
and learning technologies, (Vol. 28, 28th ed, 157-168.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5546-3.
Virtanen, P., Nevgi, A., &; Niemi,
H. (2014). Self-regulation
in higher education: students’ motivational, regulational
and learning strategies, and their relationships to study success. Studies
for the Learning Society, 3, 20-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/sls-2013-0004
Vuorre, M., & Metcalfe, J.
(2021). Measures of relative metacognitive accuracy are confounded with task
performance in tasks that permit guessing. Metacognition and Learning, 17, 269-291.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09257-1
Zapata-Zapata, A., & Vesga-Bravo,
G. J. (2023). Habilidades metacognitivas en los procesos de aprendizaje en la
educación superior: una revisión sistemática 2017-2022. [Metacognitive skills in learning
processes in higher education: a systematic review 2017-2022] Psicología Unemi, 7(13),
73-93. https://doi.org/10.29076/issn.2602-8379vol7iss13.2023pp73-93p
Zhao, L., Wang, S. & Su, YS (2024). Pre-service student teachers’ metacognition in an online learning
community: An epistemic network analysis. Education and Information
Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12439-4
Zimmerman,
B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich &
M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-40). Academic
Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7