IGHE Publications >

Volume 6, April 2026

Metacognition in Higher Education

An Overview of Key Concepts and Metacognitive Instruction

Author: Tong Zhang

Abstract

This report examines the nature of metacognition and its role in supporting students’ academic development. It begins by depicting the overall effect of metacognition on college students’ learning through examining some meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and empirical studies of metacognitive supportive practices in higher education classrooms. Next, the report outlines three mechanisms in explaining how metacognitive knowledge, the regulation of cognition, and metacognitive experiences support learning. Research reviews suggest that metacognitive instruction can support student learning across disciplines, especially when it is explicitly taught and embedded in course tasks. At the same time, differences in study design, measurement, and instructional context mean that its effects vary, and findings should be interpreted with caution rather than as universally applicable.

Further, the report connected the findings from the reviews to the pedagogical recommendations for DKU faculty and other intellectual communities by identifying key principles of effective metacognitive instruction, including the importance of giving explicit instruction, emphasizing regulation, providing resources, promoting collaboration, and offering flexible support. Practical classroom strategies, such as structured reflection, peer collaboration, and ongoing dialogue, are presented as ways to cultivate metacognitive skills and empower students to take control of their learning. In light of the opportunities and challenges posed by GenAI, this report also synthesizes findings from recent reviews and studies on its impact on learners’ metacognition, ensuring that the pedagogical recommendations remain aligned with current teaching and learning conditions in higher education.

KEYWORDS:

References

  1. Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  2. Bui, G., & Kong, A. (2019). Metacognitive instruction for peer review interaction in L2 writing. Journal of Writing Research, 11(2), 357-392. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2019.11.02.05
  3. Chardonnens, S. (2025). “Adapting educational practices for Generation Z: integrating metacognitive strategies and artificial intelligence.” Frontiers in Education Volume 10 – 2025.
  4. Chan, C.K.Y., Hu, W. Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 20, 43 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
  5. Cooper, M. M., & Sandi-Urena, S. (2009). Design and validation of an instrument to assess metacognitive skilfulness in chemistry problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 86, 240–245.
  6. Dennis, J.L., Somerville, M.P. Supporting thinking about thinking: examining the metacognition theory-practice gap in higher education. High Educ 86, 99–117 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00904-x
  7. Lee, I., & Mak, P. (2018). Metacognition and metacognitive instruction in second language writing classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 1085-1097.
  8. Muis, K. R., Kendeou, P., & Franco, G. M. (2011). Consistent results with the consistency hypothesis?The effects of epistemic beliefs on metacognitive processing. Metacognition Learning, 6, 45–63.
  9. Negretti, R. (2012). Metacognition in student academic writing: A longitudinal study of metacognitive awareness and its relation to task perception, self-regulation, and evaluation of performance. Written Communication, 29(2), 142-179.
  10. Fan, Y.,  Tang, L.,  Le, H.,  Shen, K.,  Tan, S.,  Zhao, Y.,  Shen, Y.,  Li, X., &  Gašević, D. (2025).  Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance. British Journal of Educational Technology,  56,  489–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13544 
  11. Farrelly, T., & Baker, N. (2023). Generative Artificial Intelligence: Implications and Considerations for Higher Education Practice. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1109. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111109
  12. Flavell, H. J. (1979). Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive-Developmental Inquiry, 34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
  13. Flavell, J. H., Miller, P. H., & Miller, S. A. (2002). Cognitive Development. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. Prentice-Hall. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=FLJ9AAAAMAAJ.
  14. Kim, J., Yu, S., Detrick, R. et al. Exploring students’ perspectives on Generative AI-assisted academic writing. Educ Inf Technol 30, 1265–1300 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12878-7
  15. Kloos et al., “How can Generative AI Support Education?,” 2024 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Kos Island, Greece, 2024, pp. 1-7, doi: 10.1109/EDUCON60312.2024.10578716.
  16. Prather, J., Reeves, B. N., Leinonen, J., MacNeil, S., Randrianasolo,  A. S., Becker, B. A., … & Briggs, B. (2024, August). The widening gap: The benefits and harms of generative ai for novice programmers. In Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research-Volume 1 (pp. 469-486).
  17. Qu, X., et al. (2025). Generative AI Tools in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis of Cognitive Impact. Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Association for Computing Machinery: Article 302.
  18. Pintrich, P. R. 2002. “The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessing.” Theory Into Practice, 41(4): 219–225.
  19. Rivas, S. F., et al. (2022). “Metacognitive Strategies and Development of Critical Thinking in Higher Education.” Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
  20. Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 353–387.
  21. Ruan, Z. (2014). Metacognitive awareness of EFL student writers in a Chinese ELT context. Language Awareness, 23(1-2), 76-91.
  22. Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional science, 26(1-2), 113-125.
  23. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational psychology review, 7(4), 351-371.
  24. Scott, B. M., & Levy, M. G. (2013). Metacognition: Examining the components of a fuzzy concept. Educational Research, 2(2), 120–131. https://doi.org/10.5838/erej.2013.22.04
  25. Siegesmund, A. (2017). Using self-assessment to develop metacognition and self-regulated learners. FEMS microbiology letters, 364(11), fnx096.
  26. Spirgi., & Seufert, S. (2025). GenAI as a Learning Assistant, an Empirical Study in Higher Education. International Conference on Computer Supported Education.
  27. Vliet, V. E. A., Winnips, J. C., & Brouwer, N. (2015). Flipped-Class Pedagogy Enhances Student Metacognition and Collaborative-Learning Strategies in Higher Education But Effect Does Not Persist. CBE life sciences education, 14(3), ar26. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-09-0141
  28. Victori, M. (1999). An analysis of writing knowledge in EFL composing: A case study of two effective and two less effective writers. System, 27(4), 537-555.
  29. Van Vliet, E. A., Winnips, J. C., & Brouwer, N. (2015). Flipped-class pedagogy enhances student metacognition and collaborative-learning strategies in higher education but effect does not persist. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(3), ar26.
  30. Veenman, M. V. J., et al. (2006). “Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations.” Metacognition and Learning 1(1): 3-14.
  31. Vrugt, A., & Oort, F. J. (2008). Metacognition, achievement goals, study strategies and academic achieve-ment: Pathways to achievement. Metacognition Learning, 30, 123–146.
  32. Wang, M. C., et al. (1990). “What Influences Learning? A Content Analysis of Review Literature.” The Journal of Educational Research 84(1): 30-43.
  33. Wang, K. D., Wu, L. Z., Tufts, Wieman, C., Salehi S., & N. Haber. (2025) “Scaffold or Crutch? Examining College Students’ Use and Views of Generative AI Tools for STEM Education,” 2025 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), London, United Kingdom, 2025, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.1109/EDUCON62633.2025.11016406.
  34. Wenden, A. L. (1999). An introduction to Metacognitive Knowledge and Beliefs in Language Learning: beyond the basics. System, 27(4), 435–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00043-3.
  35. Wongdaeng, M. & Higgins, S. (2023). Effectiveness of metacognitive interventions in tertiary EFL contexts: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 17(4), 795-811, DOI:10.1080/17501229.2022.2146122
  36. Zohar, A. & S.Barzilai (2013). “A review of research on metacognition in science education: current and future directions.” Studies in Science Education, 49(2): 121-136