Volume 7, Issue 3 (September 2025)
IEEPJ 2025, 7(3): 1-17 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Sepehri Sadr Y, Balaghat S R, Marziyeh A. (2025). The Effectiveness of Cognitive-Metacognitive Strategies Training on Academic Achievement in Social Studies and Cognitive Flexibility. IEEPJ. 7(3), 1-17.
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-555-en.html
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-555-en.html
1- MA Student, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran
2- University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran ,balaghat@edpsy.usb.ac.ir
3- University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahdan, Iran
2- University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran ,
3- University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahdan, Iran
Abstract: (4055 Views)
Objective: The efficacy of imparting cognitive and metacognitive strategies on the cognitive outputs of students has been substantiated through a plethora of empirical investigations. Cognitive flexibility represents a salient characteristic of students, which pertains to their capacity for open-minded reasoning and critical thinking.
Methods: Accordingly, the present investigation sought to evaluate the impact of teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies on academic performance in Social Studies, as well as on cognitive flexibility among high school learners. The methodological framework of this study was quasi-experimental, employing a pre-test and post-test design alongside a control group. The participant cohort comprised 38 high school students, who were selected via an accessible sampling technique and subsequently allocated into experimental and control groups, each consisting of 19 students. The data collection instruments included a teacher-developed academic achievement assessment and an Actively Open-Minded Thinking Scale. The experimental group underwent instruction in cognitive and metacognitive strategies across eight distinct sessions.
Results: Findings revealed that the instruction in cognitive and metacognitive strategies yielded significant improvements in both academic achievement and cognitive flexibility within the experimental group in comparison to the control group.
Conclusions: Collectively, the insights derived from this research may serve to inform educators in discerning the most efficacious strategies for augmenting the cognitive and metacognitive outputs of their students.
Methods: Accordingly, the present investigation sought to evaluate the impact of teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies on academic performance in Social Studies, as well as on cognitive flexibility among high school learners. The methodological framework of this study was quasi-experimental, employing a pre-test and post-test design alongside a control group. The participant cohort comprised 38 high school students, who were selected via an accessible sampling technique and subsequently allocated into experimental and control groups, each consisting of 19 students. The data collection instruments included a teacher-developed academic achievement assessment and an Actively Open-Minded Thinking Scale. The experimental group underwent instruction in cognitive and metacognitive strategies across eight distinct sessions.
Results: Findings revealed that the instruction in cognitive and metacognitive strategies yielded significant improvements in both academic achievement and cognitive flexibility within the experimental group in comparison to the control group.
Conclusions: Collectively, the insights derived from this research may serve to inform educators in discerning the most efficacious strategies for augmenting the cognitive and metacognitive outputs of their students.
Keywords: Cognitive Strategies, Metacognitive Strategies, Academic achievement, Social Studies, Cognitive Flexibility, High school students
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Psychology
Received: 2024/03/13 | Accepted: 2024/12/7 | Published: 2025/09/1
Received: 2024/03/13 | Accepted: 2024/12/7 | Published: 2025/09/1
References
1. Avargil, S., Lavi, R., & Dori, Y. J. (2018). Students' metacognition and metacognitive strategies in science education. Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education: Learning, teaching and assessment, 33-64. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4_3]
2. Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning: Where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 445-457. [DOI:10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00014-2]
3. Borkowski, J. G., Johnston, M. B., & Reid, M. K. (2014). Metacognition, motivation, and controlled performance. In Handbook of cognitive, social, and neuropsychological aspects of learning disabilities (pp. 147-173). Routledge.
4. Bransford, J., Vye, N., Stevens, R., Kuhl, P., Schwartz, D., Bell, P., . . . Reeves, B. (2005). Learning theories and education: Toward a decade of synergy. Handbook of Educational Psychology (2nd Edition), 95 pages.
5. Budin, S., Patti, A. L., & Rafferty, L. A. (2022). Teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies to support learning and independence. In High leverage practices for inclusive classrooms (pp. 201-217). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781003148609-20]
6. Chalmeh, R., & Latifian, M. (2013). Characteristics of the Metacognitive Learning Environment and Academic Achievement: Examining the Mediating Role of Motivational Beliefs in Students. Applied psychology, 6(4), 43-58. https://apsy.sbu.ac.ir/article_95725_0ee030b27d6c284c1979993d37983a8b.pdf
7. De Boer, H., Donker, A. S., Kostons, D. D., & Van der Werf, G. P. (2018). Long-term effects of metacognitive strategy instruction on student academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational research review, 24, 98-115. [DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2018.03.002]
8. Deák, G. O., & Wiseheart, M. (2015). Cognitive flexibility in young children: General or task-specific capacity? Journal of experimental child psychology, 138, 31-53. [DOI:10.1016/j.jecp.2015.04.003]
9. Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual review of psychology, 64(1), 135-168. [DOI:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750]
10. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random house.
11. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906. [DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906]
12. Guzmán-Valenzuela, C., Chiappa, R., Tagle, A. R. M., Ismail, N., & Pedraja-Rejas, L. (2023). Investigating critical thinking in higher education in Latin America: Acknowledging an epistemic disjuncture. Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning (CriStal), 11(si1), 71-99. [DOI:10.14426/cristal.v11iSI.624]
13. Karimi, P. D., F., Moraadi, P. D., A.R., Kadivar, P. D., P., & Kormi Noori, P. D., R. (2015). Predicting Student Performance in Verbal Math Problems Based on Cognitive, Metacognitive, and Affective Factors [Research]. Quarterly Journal of Education, 31(1), 9-44. http://qjoe.ir/article-1-177-fa.html
14. Kisac, I., & Budak, Y. (2014). Metacognitive strategies of the university students with respect to their perceived self-confidence levels about learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3336-3339. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.759]
15. Ku, K. Y., & Ho, I. T. (2010). Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking. Metacognition and learning, 5, 251-267. [DOI:10.1007/s11409-010-9060-6]
16. Lei, P.-L., Sun, C.-T., Lin, S. S., & Huang, T.-K. (2015). Effect of metacognitive strategies and verbal-imagery cognitive style on biology-based video search and learning performance. Computers & Education, 87, 326-339. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.004]
17. Martin, M. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1995). A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychological reports, 76(2), 623-626. [DOI:10.2466/pr0.1995.76.2.623]
18. Mirderikvand, F., Sabzian, S., & Garavand, H. (2015). Effectiveness of Metacognitive Techniques Training on Girl Students Self - Efficacy in High Schools of Isfahan City. Research in School and Virtual Learning, 2(8), 7-16. https://etl.journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_1824_b1007b5d3a394300a67ba01e532d2e66.pdf
19. Mohammadi Darvish Baqal, N., Hatami, H., Asadzadeh, H., & Ahadi, H. (2013). A Study of the Effect of Teaching (Cognitive and Metacognitive) Self-Regulation Strategies on High School Students' Motivational Beliefs (Educational Motivation, Self-Efficacy, Test Anxiety). Educational Psychology, 9(27), 50-64. https://jep.atu.ac.ir/article_2469_68350b68d6a10e259dfbcf06ebfe2f85.pdf
20. Mortazavizadeh, G., Golshan, M., & Rezai, M. J. (2022). Metacognitive Strategies Awareness and Use and Reading Comprehension of Iranian EFL University Students: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Iranian Evolutionary Educational Psychology Journal, 4(3), 516-535. [DOI:10.52547/ieepj.4.3.516]
21. Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into practice, 41(4), 219-225. [DOI:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3]
22. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801-813. [DOI:10.1177/0013164493053003024]
23. Rafiepour, A., & Esmaili, M. (2023). Effective Factors on the Math Performance of Eighth Grade Students in The TIMSS; A Comparative Study between Iran and Selected Countries. Educational and Scholastic studies, 11(4), 646-621. https://pma.cfu.ac.ir/article_2814_65c9b08458d1232e2f5d630a5fad6242.pdf
24. Saeed, N., Zare, H., Moosapour, N., Sarmadi, M., & Hormozi, M. (2023). The Study of Relationship Between Studentsâ Cognitive and Meta-cognitive Strategies and Interactions in Virtual Education with Academic Achievement. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 16(4), 73-96. https://journal.irphe.ac.ir/article_702742_8e15f0aeecaa79549e4dd4560648ce98.pdf
25. Santrock, J. W. (2011). Educational psychology. McGraw-Hill.
26. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary educational psychology, 19(4), 460-475. [DOI:10.1006/ceps.1994.1033]
27. Seif, A. A. (2014). Modern Educational Psychology (Psychology of Learning and Education) (Fifth Edition ed.). Rawan Publishing.
28. Seif, A. A., & Shaghaghi, F. (2005). Impact of Reading and Learning Strategies on Payame Noor University Students' Learning and It's Stability after One Semester. Learning And Distant Education, 3(2), 4-15.
29. Slavin, R. E. (2013). Effective programmes in reading and mathematics: Lessons from the best evidence encyclopaedia. School effectiveness and school improvement, 24(4), 383-391. [DOI:10.1080/09243453.2013.797913]
30. Soleymani, S., & Malekzadeh, A. (2023). Investigating the reasons for the low scores of Iranian students in the TIMSS and Perls test. Mental Health in School, 1(2), 37-42. [DOI:10.1155/2023/9860598]
31. Spiro, R. J., Collins, B. P., & Ramchandran, A. R. (2008). Modes of openness and flexibility in cognitive flexibility hypertext learning environments. In Online and distance learning: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 1903-1908). IGI Global. [DOI:10.4018/978-1-59904-935-9.ch152]
32. Spiro, R. J., Klautke, H. A., Cheng, C., & Gaunt, A. (2017). Cognitive flexibility theory and the assessment of 21st-century skills. In Handbook on measurement, assessment, and evaluation in higher education (pp. 631-637). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781315709307-50]
33. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2007). Natural myside bias is independent of cognitive ability. Thinking & Reasoning, 13(3), 225-247. [DOI:10.1080/13546780600780796]
34. Svedholm-Häkkinen, A. M., & Lindeman, M. (2018). Actively open-minded thinking: Development of a shortened scale and disentangling attitudes towards knowledge and people. Thinking & Reasoning, 24(1), 21-40. [DOI:10.1080/13546783.2017.1378723]
35. Taylor, S. (1999). Better learning through better thinking: Developing students' metacognitive abilities. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 30(1), 34-45. [DOI:10.1080/10790195.1999.10850084]
36. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(2), 64-70. [DOI:10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
