Content uploaded by Romiro Bautista
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Romiro Bautista on May 02, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Romiro Bautista
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Romiro Bautista on Apr 29, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE)
Vol. 11, No. 2, June 2022, pp. 658~664
ISSN: 2252-8822, DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v11i2.22018 658
Journal homepage: http://ijere.iaescore.com
Students’ cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies
towards hands-on science
Leslie Gomez Discipulo1, Romiro Gordo Bautista2
1Criminology Department, Quirino State University-Cabarroguis Campus, Cabarroguis, Philippines
2International Relations Office, Quirino State University-Main Campus, Diffun, Philippines
Article Info
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received Aug 26, 2021
Revised Mar 25, 2022
Accepted Apr 10, 2022
Cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies are geared towards giving
autonomy to every learner in their studies. Students’ affordances on
cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies in their studies are believed
to predict their academic success and performances in their learning tasks.
This study determined the cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies in
science among the 278 education students in the three campuses of a state
university in the Philippines as bases in crafting a developmental plan to
bolster the science instruction in the university. Using the descriptive-
inferential research and employing a questionnaire on the cognitive and
metacognitive strategies of education students, the following are known:
incomparable affordances of the students along planning and information
management practices while comparable affordances were determined on the
respondents’ cognitive learning strategies; and incomparable affordances
along procedural knowledge while comparable affordances along declarative
and conditional knowledge were determined on the respondents’
metacognitive learning strategies. Based on the results, a developmental plan
was designed to bolster the science courses in the education programs of the
university centering on the inclusion of research camp, research expo,
shepherding on research through the niche program, immersion, and hands-
on science. It was recommended that the proposed enhanced science
program will be implemented in the university system as there is only one
science course in their respective programs in the new curricular plot.
Keywords:
Cognitive learning strategies
Developmental plan
Education students
Hands-on science
Metacognitive process
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.
Corresponding Author:
Romiro Gordo Bautista
Office of the International Relation Officer, Quirino State University-Main Campus
3411 Diffun, Quirino, Philippines
Email: romiro.bautista@qsu.edu.ph
1. INTRODUCTION
Learners employ various unique strategies in facilitating their route processes in learning, i.e.,
memorizing and processing concepts particularly in science. Science, as a highly technical subject, involves
the application of unique strategies like the cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies. In fact, it is
claimed that the employment of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies poses significant relationship
with the students’ academic achievement in schools and universities [1], [2].
Considering the dynamic learning situation, learners consolidate cognitive and metacognitive
learning strategies and employ it in a unique manner. Their ability of understanding concepts and tailoring
strategies to understand concepts center the idea of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies. In the
Metacognitive Theory of Learning, Flavell [3] postulated that metacognition is employed in monitoring and
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822
Students’ cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies towards hands-on … (Leslie Gomez Discipulo)
659
regulating learning processes which recoils their ability to manage their own learning situation (selection,
evaluation, revision of cognitive tasks, goals, and strategies).
Furthermore, the theory included four classes of metacognition including metacognitive knowledge,
experiences, goals and tasks, and strategies or actions. Metacognitive knowledge centers on the learners’
knowledge and beliefs about their thinking processes. This is related to the learners’ interests, abilities, and
goals that complement their cognitive and metacognitive knowledge. Apparently, learners integrate their
information, memories, and a-priori experiences which accounts for the generation of strong affective
responses in the process of building better cognitive and metacognitive knowledge. Preceding the learning
process is the development and improvement of knowledge about a certain concept or problem. When
realized, learners tend to draw goals and tasks through an ordered process and strategies. These processes and
strategies ensure the attainment of the drawn goals under their self-regulation techniques [2], [4]–[6].
Science as a built-in course in the teacher education programs offered in the current study is
observed in three unique affordances. Moreover, there is only one science course offered in the said program.
This concordance impinges analyses so as to prepare prospective teachers to become science teachers. The
crux is cognitive and metacognitive knowledge and skills of students in science is very important considering
the previous discussions. However, this was never conducted in the university and yet, there is a varied
instruction in science unique to their locale in the three campuses of the study although a minimum learning
competency is formulated. It is for this reason that the researchers envision to assess the cognitive and
metacognitive learning strategies of the first- and second-year college students in science so as to come up
with a developmental plan in improving further their affordances in learning science. Aptly, this study was
designed to determine the cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies of education students in science in
the three campuses of a state university in the Philippines. Likewise, a documentary analysis on the current
status of science instruction in the research locale was employed in crafting a developmental plan to bolster
the science instruction in the university.
2. RESEARCH METHOD
The descriptive-inferential method was employed in this study. Furthermore, the comparative design
was employed to compare the cognitive regulation practices and metacognitive strategies of the respondents.
The descriptive design was used since the proponent’s collected information from respondents without
manipulating any condition that can possibly change their perceptions, beliefs, and dispositions with regards
to the thesis of this study. Furthermore, this design fits best when the objective is to obtain information
concerning the current status of the phenomena which is described like what exists with respect to variables
or conditions in a situation. It also employed a documentary analysis on the current instructional delivery of
the course in the three campuses of a state university through the course syllabus that the instructors and
professors are using in their respective classes. Particular attention was given to the learning activities and
major course requirements required by the professors in the three campuses of the study.
A total of 278 education students participated in the study. This number is determined through
G*power. G*power is a statistical software that computes samples vis-à-vis power analyses of various tests
like t-test, ANOVA, and some exact tests. Through, stratified random sampling technique, this number is
equated to the population in the three campuses of the locale of the study to ensure equal representation.
The state university where this study was conducted has three campuses: i) Campus 1 is the main
campus that offers Bachelor in Secondary Education (BSE), Bachelor of Elementary Education (BEEd), and
Bachelor of Technology and Livelihood Education (BTLE) programs; ii) Campus 2 only offers the BEEd
program; and iii) Campus 3 only offers the BTLE program. It must be noted that only Campus 1 offers a
course that specializes teacher education students to become science majors through its BSE program. The
BEEd and BTLE programs do not intend to produce science majors. However, graduates from the BEEd
program are expected to teach science subjects later when they opt to as they would be teaching general
education courses in the elementary grades. Furthermore, it must be noted that the students in the BEEd
program take only one science subject (science, technology, and society) in completing their academic
degrees. The offering of this science course in the three campuses is not uniform. Campus 1 and 3 offer it
during the second year of their students while Campus 2 offer it during the first year. Albeit offered in
different curriculum year levels, the authors deemed it irrelevant since there is only one science subject
offered in the various programs except for the BSE program. Hence, the current study only employed their
campus as grouping variables.
The respondents’ affordances on cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies were determined
by using a questionnaire formulated and standardized by Lai [7]. The questionnaire posted an alpha value of
.78 in the current study; thus, it is reliable. There are two parts of the questionnaire: i) Part 1 covers the
regulation practices; and ii) Part 2 covers the metacognitive practices of the respondents in their science
subject. The regulation practices include planning, information management, debugging or correcting, and
ISSN: 2252-8822
Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 11, No. 2, June 2022: 658-664
660
comprehension and evaluation. On the other hand, the metacognitive practices include the respondent’s
procedural, declarative, and conditional knowledge. Indicators of each variable in the questionnaire were
rated by the respondents based on a 4-point Likert scale showcasing their degree of agreement (1=disagree to
4=very much agree).
The gathered data were analyzed through mean, ANOVA, and Scheffe test. Range was employed in
determining the general descriptive interpretation on their agreement. The range is: 1 (1.0-1.74)=Disagree;
2 (1.75-2.49)=Agree; 3 (2.50-3.24)=Much Agree, and 4 (3.25-5:00)=Very Much Agree. The results of the
statistical treatment were the bases of discussion vis-à-vis the research problems. Conclusions were also
drawn based on the results.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1. Regulation practices on cognition
Table 1 shows the regulation practices of the respondents along planning, information management,
debugging, and comprehension and evaluation monitoring. It shows that students in Campus 3 are better in
planning when compared with their counterparts in Campus 1 and Campus 2 (F-value and p-value of 5.640
and .004, respectively). As to information management, respondents from Campus 3 are again better than
their counterparts in Campus 1 and Campus 2 (F-value and p-value of 7.830 and less than .001, respectively)
while students in Campus 1 are better than their counterparts in Campus 2. On the other hand, respondents
have comparable employment of debugging and comprehension and evaluation monitoring strategies.
Table 1. Regulation practices on cognition among education students
Regulation practices on cognition
Campus 1
Campus 2
Campus 3
Mean
DI
Mean
DI
Mean
DI
1
Planning
3.18A
MA
3.10A
MA
3.30B
VMA
2
Information management
3.17AC
MA
3.04B
MA
3.32CA
VMA
3
Debugging (Correcting)
3.29A
VMA
3.29A
VMA
3.21A
MA
4
Comprehension and evaluation monitoring
3.20A
MA
3.12A
MA
3.25A
MA
Note: VMA-Very Much Agree; MA-Much Agree
*Indicators of the same letter within rows are comparable at .05 level of significance; cells within rows
labelled with different letter post significant results; cells labeled with two letters identify which group differ
significantly. Post hoc is calculated via Scheffe test
The foregoing results imply disparity between and among the respondents’ regulation practices on
cognition. It is believed that the interplay of the respondents’ peers and teachers play significant effects on
their concordances, practices, activities, attitude, and behavior. Previous studies [8], [9] construed that the
perceptions of students on their cognitive learning practices of students from school to school is influenced
by their peers and teachers. Henceforth, it is recommended that a complementing community of inquiry and
practice may be simulated and practiced in the three campuses through Science Camps, Field Studies,
Research Expos, among others. In this way, they may find their niche and may develop the culture of science
inquiry which could stem into innovative minds through research and immersion. It must be noted that
cognitive strategies are paramount to one’s academic achievement [10]–[12] and better motivations in doing
such learning tasks under their self-regulations [13]–[15].
Moreover, it was claimed that planning strategy is very important in the process of mental cognition
[6], [16]. This mental cognition, on the other hand, is controlled by the experiences, skills, and self-regulation
of the student-learners as they employ their distinct cognitive strategies in learning [6], [17]. Students need to
have a clear view on the planning requirements of their respective courses for the students to plan out in
meeting the activities required of them particularly in science [18]. In the case of the current study, planning
is very important as the course (science, technology, and society) needs to employ academic rigors along
research. It could be noted that the course requires science innovations through research, i.e., documenting
investigatory projects, indigenous knowledge system of the locality, ethno-medicine, pseudo-science, among
others. On the other hand, information management is also a very important part of the processes in
cognition. Students, under self-regulation principles, need to manage the information that they acquire in
their learning tasks. Information management, as part of the regulating practices in cognition, increases the
chances of a well-processed learning task vis-à-vis educational objectives, materials, and activities [12]–[14].
Owing to the aforementioned results, it can be concluded that the respondents in the three campuses
of the locale of the study accorded incomparable regulation practices in cognition along planning,
information management, and debugging or correcting. This impinge a potent factor in terms of the
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822
Students’ cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies towards hands-on … (Leslie Gomez Discipulo)
661
comparability of graduates of the teacher education programs in the university; hence, a unified curriculum
and program of activities may be crafted and adopted at a bar-none standard.
3.2. Metacognitive strategies
Table 2 presents the metacognitive strategies of the respondents along procedural, declarative, and
conditional knowledge. It can be gleaned that the respondents from Campus 3 vouched better employment of
procedural knowledge when compared with their counterparts from Campus 1 and Campus 2 (F-value and
p-value of 3.066 and .048, respectively). On the other hand, comparable results were observed on the
responses of the respondents along declarative and conditional knowledge.
Table 2. Metacognitive strategies among education students
Metacognitive strategies
Campus 1
Campus 2
Campus 3
Mean
DI
Mean
DI
Mean
DI
1
Procedural knowledge
3.24A
MA
3.21A
MA
3.54B
VMA
2
Declarative knowledge
3.19A
MA
3.15A
MA
3.26A
VMA
3
Conditional knowledge
3.36A
VMA
3.37A
VMA
3.30A
VMA
Note: VMA-Very Much Agree; MA-Much Agree
*Indicators of the same letter within rows are comparable at .05 level of significance; cells
within rows labelled with different letter post significant results; cells labeled with two letters
identify which group differ significantly. Post hoc is calculated via Scheffe test
It may be noted that science is a laborious discipline which entails academic rigors and a lot of
actions, e.g., performing experiments, conducting field studies, writing narratives and journals, observing and
reporting. Each activity employs various strategies. It was claimed that metacognitive strategies are
considered as the most important factors in developing the abilities of every learner as they enable the
learners to monitor their progress, accomplishments, and learning directions [12], [17].
When students developed their metacognitive awareness and practiced them holistically, they tend
to become autonomous, performers, and activators of learning [19], [20]. Part and parcel to this activation is
the act of building connection [21], [22]. In this situation, the learners embed activities that hone their
connection with other individuals like their peers and knowledgeable others (KOs) like their teachers.
Discovering and discussing strategies are extensive practices that every learner employs in the learning
process [4]. This continued practice of inquiry sustains and leverages their learning experiences until this
inquiry becomes a practice reciprocating efficacy among them.
It is construed that students who can characterize information that they have learned from what is
not learned are most likely the students who academically succeed in their learning tasks; hence,
metacognition is a strong predictor of academic success [4], [23], [24]. However, it must be noted that
differences on self-efficacy beliefs, level of expertise, goal orientations, susceptibility to social influences,
and cultural differences affect the metacognitive affordances of students [2], [6], [25]–[29].
In the case of the current study where there is only one science course in the program of studies of
the respondents, it matters to employ metacognitive learning strategies to enable them to be science teachers
in the future especially those who are taking the BEEd program. Teachers assisting these prospective teachers
must employ attention in the development of these scientific knowledge, procedure and practices, as well as
the attitude relevant thereto. Shepherding and the umbrella system in developing their competence towards a
certain niche are very much wanting particularly in research.
3.3. Status of teaching science, technology, and society in a state university in the Philippines
The three campuses in the current study, although they are from a university system, offer the course
(science, technology, and society) in different nomenclature unique to the instructor or professor teaching the
course. In Campus 1, the course is offered using hands-on science practices, research and immersion
activities, and culminated in a research expo as reflected in the course syllabus. Students were grouped to come
up with investigatory projects and social researches and are required to present in a colloquium. On the other
hand, Campuses 2 and 3 do not employ activities as employed in Campus 1 as evident in their course syllabi.
The course is taken in a pure theoretical offering although varied forms of learning designs are undertaken.
Since the three campuses are using the prescribed curriculum for their academic programs, the
science course (GE 7–science, technology, and society) is a general education course taken by all teacher
education students before the completion of their academic degrees. However, the three campuses offer it in
different curriculum year level.
ISSN: 2252-8822
Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 11, No. 2, June 2022: 658-664
662
3.4. Developmental plan in enhancing the hands-on science of education students in a state university
in the Philippines
Metacognitive strategies empower students to think about their own thinking. Awareness of the
learning process enhances control over their own learning. It also enhances personal capacity for self-
regulation and managing one’s own motivation for learning. Metacognitive activities can include planning
how to approach learning tasks, identifying appropriate strategies to complete a task, evaluating progress, and
monitoring comprehension.
Individuals with well-developed metacognitive skills can think through a problem or approach a
learning task, select appropriate strategies, and make decisions about a course of action to resolve the
problem or successfully perform the task. They often think about their own thinking processes, taking time to
think about, and learn from mistakes or inaccuracies. Teaching metacognitive skills can greatly enhance
learning for all students in all subject areas. The objective of this intervention is to make science students
independent and successful thinkers while the goal of metacognitive skills is to help students understand the
way they learn. It is a process designed for students to ‘think’ about their ‘thinking.’
The schematic diagram presented in Figure 1 depicts the process on what should be done in school
and in the community in order to produce education graduates who possess the knowledge and skills required
of the 21st century science teachers. In order to attain the goal, the science teachers on the ground should put
into practice the following: In the classroom, the teacher should do more hands-on activities, inquiry-based
instruction, as well as problem-based learning that is “learning by doing” activities. Experimentation is
another important activity. Conducting experiments, as a way of investigating scientific phenomena and
acquiring scientific knowledge and skills, is a very significant method in teaching and learning science. In
every activity, leaners need to design mechanisms and implement courses of actions in investigating their
assigned tasks from their prior knowledge and experiences, scientifically frame allowable time to complete
the activity, and draw appropriate direction and offshoot of the possible outcomes based on rigorous
investigation. Hence, it is very important for the learner to have a clear understanding on the aforementioned
questions in the planning stage of each activity.
Figure 1. Developmental plan in enhancing the hands-on science of Education students
Special topics on research and research communication are equally important in the classroom.
Doing investigatory project is common in science but not all school perform investigatory projects. Learners
should be exposed to varied forms of research like social sciences, ethno-medicine, research writing, and
communicating research outcomes. Again, in every stage of each activity, planning has to take place and at
any stage of any activity, monitoring has to take place in order to assess whether everything in the activity is
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822
Students’ cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies towards hands-on … (Leslie Gomez Discipulo)
663
going smoothly, and if not, remedial measures have to take place. It is important for the learner to assess any
learning gained in every activity. If learning is not gained, then the learner has to review the planning and
monitoring stage to assess what went wrong. Henceforth, teacher-facilitators may consider student
metacognition when implementing active-learning strategies.
Schools do not thrive in isolation. Schools exist in the community. So, the teachers and the learners
should make the community as an avenue of learning, discovery, and research. The community should serve
as an immersion center where students put into practice what they have learned and at the same time to use
their own community as a source and location for learning [30]. The state university, which is located in a
vast area composed of abundant natural resources, endemic plant and animal species, culture, and belief, can
successfully implement this developmental plan to enhance the lone science course in the curricula of the
teacher education program. This is where education students can actualize their educational experiences in
science, technology, and society. In this manner, education students may continuously wonder on the
processes of science particularly on conducting science investigatory projects and the social sciences aspects
of science like documenting the Indigenous knowledge system of the locality, ethno-medicine, pseudo-
science, among others. The community where the university is based is a dynamic laboratory where students
can find their specimen for classroom investigation.
Education students, who are prospective teachers in elementary and secondary schools, may
developed a sturdy culture of research and innovation, scientific processes, procedures, and attitudes in
completing venues, the classroom and the community. Furthermore, teaching them to do research,
community immersion, and writing journals and journal articles will ensure robust scientific cognition which
they could model when they are already in the field. The development of holistic understanding and scientific
knowledge and competencies is a parlance in the teacher education programs as they will soon model and
transfer their learnings to their future students.
4. CONCLUSION
The study found that the regulation practices in cognition of the respondents are afforded averagely
much agree. The metacognitive practices of the respondents are afforded optimally very much agree. There is
significant difference on the affordances of the respondents on their regulation practices in cognition and
metacognitive practices in learning science. A developmental plan may be integrated in the course that will
center on the inclusion of hands-on science, special topics on research and research communication,
community immersion, shepherding in research through the Niche Program, and the employment of Research
Camps and Research Expos.
REFERENCES
[1] L. G. Weil et al., “The development of metacognitive ability in adolescence,” Consciousness and Cognition, vol. 22, no. 1,
pp. 264–271, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2013.01.004.
[2] M. Fooladvand, “The effect of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in academic achievement: A systematic review,” New
Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 313–322, 2017, doi:
10.18844/gjhss.v3i1.1780.
[3] J. H. Flavell, “Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry,” American Psychologist,
vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 906–911, 1979, doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906.
[4] E. Mitsea and A. Drigas, “A journey into the metacognitive learning strategies,” International Journal of Online and Biomedical
Engineering, vol. 15, no. 14, 2019, doi: 10.3991/IJOE.V15I14.11379.
[5] G. Schraw, “Promoting general metacognitive awareness,” Instructional Science, vol. 26, no. 1–2, pp. 113–125, 1998, doi:
10.1023/a:1003044231033.
[6] R. Bautista, “The impact of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies in desktop teaching,” ANGLISTICUM International
Journal of Literature, Linguistics, & Interdisciplinary Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 135–143, 2012, doi: 10.0001/(aj).v1i2.380.g417.
[7] E. Lai, “Metacognition: A literature Review,” Always learning: Pearson research report, 2011.
[8] G. P. Bhattarai, S. B. Khanal, S. Acharya, D. R. Acharya, and S. Shakya, “National assessment of student achievement (NASA)
2013,” Education Review Office, Sanothimi, Bhaktapur, Nepal, pp. 1–178, 2013.
[9] L. Darling-Hammond, L. Flook, C. Cook-Harvey, B. Barron, and D. Osher, “Implications for educational practice of the science
of learning and development,” Applied Developmental Science, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 97–140, 2020, doi:
10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791.
[10] M. Radovan, “Cognitive and metacognitive aspects of key competency ‘learning to learn,’” Pedagogika, vol. 133, no. 1, pp. 28–
42, 2019, doi: 10.15823/p.2019.133.2.
[11] M. Pressley and K. R. Harris, “Cognitive Strategies Instruction: From Basic Research to Classroom Instruction,” Journal of
Education, vol. 189, no. 1–2, pp. 77–94, 2009, doi: 10.1177/0022057409189001-206.
[12] K. D. Tanner, “Promoting student metacognition.,” CBE Life Sciences Education, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 113–120, 2012, doi:
10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033.
[13] B. Karami, A. A. Karami, and N. Hashemi, “Effectiveness of cognitive and metacognitive strategies training on creativity,
achievement motive and academic self-concept,” Journal of Innovation and Creativity in the Humanities, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 121–
140, 2013.
[14] J. L. Meece, P. C. Blumenfeld, and R. H. Hoyle, “Students’ Goal Orientations and Cognitive Engagement in Classroom
Activities,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 514–523, 1988, doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.514.
ISSN: 2252-8822
Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 11, No. 2, June 2022: 658-664
664
[15] P. R. Pintrich, “Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement,” Journal of
Educational Psychology, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 544–555, 2000, doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.544.
[16] T. Radüntz, “The Effect of Planning, Strategy Learning, and Working Memory Capacity on Mental Workload,” Scientific
Reports, vol. 10, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-63897-6.
[17] I. R. Cornford, “Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies as a Basis for Effective Lifelong Learning : How Far Have We
Progressed ?” Paper presented at the AARE Annual Conference, Melbourne, 2004, pp. 1–15.
[18] J. H. Flavell, “Development of children’s knowledge about the mental world,” International Journal of Behavioral Development,
vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 15–23, 2000, doi: 10.1080/016502500383421.
[19] S. Jaleel and P. P., “A Study on the Metacognitive Awareness of Secondary School Students,” Universal Journal of Educational
Research, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 165–172, 2016, doi: 10.13189/ujer.2016.040121.
[20] M. Farahian and F. Avarzamani, “The impact of portfolio on EFL learners’ metacognition and writing performance,” Cogent
Education, vol. 5, no. 1, 2018, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2018.1450918.
[21] D. Muijs and C. Bokhove, “Metacognition and Self-Regulation: Evidence Review,” London: Educational Endowment
Foundation, 2020, [Online]. Available: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Metacognition_and_self-
regulation_review.pdf.
[22] E. Panadero, “A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 8,
Apr. 2017, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422.
[23] G. Vrdoljak and T. Velki, “Metacognition and intelligence as predictors of academic success,” Croatian Journal of Education,
vol. 14, pp. 802–907, 2012, doi: 10.15516/cje.v14i4.46.
[24] D. Schunk, Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective, 6th ed. Pearson Education Inc., 2012.
[25] A. M. A. Aloqleh and K. S. M. Teh, “The Effectiveness of Metacognition on Academic Achievement among the Jordanian
Universities Students,” International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 9, no. 9, 2019, doi:
10.6007/ijarbss/v9-i9/6315.
[26] K. A. Renninger and S. E. Hidi, “The self and its impact,” in The Cambridge Handbook of Motivation and Learning. Cambridge
University Press, 2019, doi: 10.1017/9781316823279.
[27] M. J. Landau, D. Oyserman, L. A. Keefer, and G. C. Smith, “The college journey and academic engagement: How metaphor use
enhances identity-based motivation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 106, no. 5, pp. 679–698, 2014, doi:
10.1037/a0036414.
[28] İ. Y. İşgör, “Metacognitive Skills, Academic Success and Exam Anxiety as the Predictors of Psychological Well-being,” Journal
of Education and Training Studies, vol. 4, no. 9, 2016, doi: 10.11114/jets.v4i9.1607.
[29] H. Korpershoek, R. B. King, D. M. McInerney, R. N. Nasser, F. A. Ganotice, and D. A. Watkins, “Gender and cultural differences
in school motivation,” Research Papers in Education, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 27–51, 2021, doi: 10.1080/02671522.2019.1633557.
[30] X. Faizo, “Science learning with and in communities: Engaging students through authentic community-based science,” Canada
Education Association, vol. 5, no. 1, 2016, doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4160.8080.
BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS
Leslie Gomez Discipulo received the Master's degree in Education from Quirino
State University (QSU), Diffun, Quirino, Philippines in 2020. She currently works as a full-
time instructor at Quirino State University- Cabarroguis Campus. She is passionate about
raising the quality of teaching and learning of students in the higher education settings. Her
current research interests include science education, 21st century teaching and learning,
school-based assessment and classroom research. She can be contacted at email:
leslie.discipulo@qsu.edu.ph.
Romiro Gordo Bautista earned a straight-degree programs in science education:
from his baccalaureate to doctorate in the Philippines. He has written at least 49 papers and
published the same to local and international journals. He is also a member of various local
and international organizations and reviewer and editor of various international journals
around the world. Prof. Bautista, a full-fledged professor at Quirino State University,
Philippines, held various key positions from local universities in the Philippines to
international university in the Kingdom of Bahrain. At present, he is the International
Relations Officer of Quirino State University. He can be contacted at email:
romiro.bautista@qsu.edu.ph.
