2.1.1 Definition of Metacognition

The concept of metacognition has long intrigued educational psychologists, and its importance in academic achievement is well established. Metacognitive knowledge improves the quality and effectiveness of academic learning (Schraw, Reference Schraw1998). This awareness not only improves self-regulated learning (SRL; Wenden, Reference Wenden2002) but also fosters learner autonomy (Victori & Lockhart, Reference Victori and Lockhart1995), allowing students to take charge of their educational journeys and adapt to various learning environments. Furthermore, metacognitive skills are closely linked to scholastic achievement, as they empower learners to set goals, monitor their progress, and adjust their approaches to overcome challenges (Zimmerman & Bandura, Reference Zimmerman and Bandura1994). By cultivating these skills, students can achieve higher levels of academic success and develop the resilience needed to tackle complex tasks. Fairbanks et al. (Reference Fairbanks, Duffy and Faircloth2010) contended that teachers who recognise metacognition’s place in learning can better support students’ development. By integrating metacognitive strategies into their teaching practices, educators can create a more supportive learning environment that encourages students to reflect on their thinking, evaluate their understanding, and apply their knowledge more effectively.

Due to its interdisciplinary nature and multiple theoretical perspectives, metacognition has no universal definition. However, in the field of educational psychology, the description that Flavell provided in the 1970s is widely regarded as foundational. Known for his theory-of-mind approach, he explained metacognition as ‘the active monitoring and consequent regulation and orchestration of these processes in relation to the cognitive objects or data on which learners bear, usually in the service of some concrete goal or objective’ (Flavell, Reference Flavell and Resnick1976, p. 232). A core feature of this definition is that metacognition involves applying the theory of mind to cognitive tasks.

The theory of mind refers to one’s cognitive ability to ‘attribute mental states, such as beliefs, desires, and intentions, to oneself and others’ (Lockl & Schneider, Reference Lockl and Schneider2006, p. 16). Boekaerts (Reference Boekaerts1997) expanded on this notion by stating that metacognition encompasses not only a theory of mind but also a ‘theory of self, theory of learning, and learning environments’ (p. 165). Building on these ideas, Flavell (Reference Flavell1979) further defined metacognition as learners’ awareness of their cognitive and executive processes with the aim of regulating various aspects of cognitive activities. He proposed three domains within metacognition: metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive experiences, and metacognitive strategies. Additionally, Flavell (Reference Flavell1979) conceptualised metacognition as consisting of four components: metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive experiences, goals, and strategy activation.

2.1.2 Frameworks on Understanding Metacognition

Flavell (Reference Flavell1985) introduced a holistic, two-dimensional framework to clarify metacognition. These dimensions are knowledge of metacognition (person, task, and strategies) and regulation of metacognition (planning, monitoring, and evaluating). His model captures both the cognitive nature of metacognition and this concept’s role in knowledge regulation. Many researchers have adopted the classification to operationalise metacognition. Flavell’s framework affords teachers a richer sense of students’ metacognition, enabling instructors to more readily facilitate change in students’ learning processes and outcomes. For instance, learners’ comprehension of person-oriented variables influences their decision making when choosing strategies, monitoring these techniques’ application, and transferring them to new learning tasks. Similarly, learners’ knowledge of task-related variables empowers them to select approaches suited to specific activities. Learners’ understanding of different strategies also guides them in making informed decisions about options, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of their educational endeavours. Understanding the notions of planning, monitoring, and evaluating is of utmost importance for teachers and learners alike. A solid grasp of planning allows teachers to develop well-structured lessons that align with desired learning outcomes. Moreover, by closely monitoring students’ progress, teachers can identify individual strengths and weaknesses and offer targeted support to encourage optimal learning. Evaluation enables teachers to assess learning outcomes, provide timely and constructive feedback, and foster students’ growth. Meanwhile, learners benefit from understanding planning, monitoring, and evaluating by being able to set clear and achievable goals, track their progress, and make necessary adjustments. They employ SRL strategies to appraise their own performance, reflect on their comprehension, and improve by taking ownership of their education and becoming self-directed learners.

Also in the realm of metacognition, scholars have embraced a framework that categorises metacognitive knowledge into three types based on respective processes: declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge (Paris et al., Reference Paris, Cross and Lipson1984). Declarative knowledge refers to factual understanding about oneself (i.e., a sense of one’s skills, intellectual capacities, affective factors, and cognitive abilities). For instance, learners may possess declarative knowledge when they recognise their strengths and weaknesses in a certain subject area or discover their preferred learning styles. Procedural knowledge, on the other hand, calls for making decisions about task implementation by employing proper strategies (Paris et al., Reference Paris, Cross and Lipson1984). Let us consider learning to swim. At first, despite receiving directions from an instructor, a learner may struggle to swim until they have practiced a few times. Repetition leads to this task becoming implicit knowledge, which resides in the learner’s subconscious. Such knowledge is difficult to quantify; it arises from practice and experience. Conditional knowledge pertains to the decision-making process about when, where, and why specific strategies should be used to accomplish particular tasks (Schraw, Reference Schraw1998). This type of knowledge is crucial for applying suitable techniques and allocating resources efficiently. Conditional knowledge enables learners to act as guides in determining when and how strategies can be adopted to execute a task. For instance, a student may possess conditional knowledge when they recognise that using mnemonic devices is beneficial for memorising information and then identifies fitting contexts in which to deploy this approach.

According to Brown (Reference Brown, Weinert and Kluwe1987), metacognitive regulation differs from metacognitive skills, as it refers to how people detect distracting internal and external stimuli in order to sustain effort over time for executive functions. Schraw (Reference Schraw1998) elaborated on planning, monitoring, and evaluating. Planning involves one’s ability to use appropriate strategies and resources to complete tasks. It reflects the thoughtful consideration of steps required to accomplish a goal and the successful coordination of one’s approach. By engaging in careful planning, learners can optimise their efforts and increase their chances of success. Monitoring refers to one’s capacity to check their performance during tasks; it involves keeping an eye on one’s progress, identifying deviations or errors, and adjusting to stay on track. Effective monitoring allows learners to address issues as they arise, which helps learners stay engaged in the educational process. Evaluating calls for assessing one’s regulatory processes and learning outcomes, namely by thinking about the utility of chosen strategies, the quality of one’s work, and overall success in the learning experience. This metacognitive skill enables learners to analyse their own performance and make deliberate decisions for future improvements. Schraw and Dennison (Reference Schraw and Dennison1994) proposed two additional metacognitive strategies based on debugging and information management. Debugging strategies involve noting and rectifying lapses in comprehension and performance. Learners with this skill can acknowledge misconceptions, thus developing deeper understanding and more precise performance. Information management strategies pertain to processing, organising, elaborating, and summarising task-related information. These strategies aid learners in manipulating the information they encounter to promote comprehension and retention.

Anastasia Efklides has offered insight into metacognition as well. For example, Efklides (Reference Efklides, Chambers, Izaute and Marescaux2001) stated that learners’ metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences are closely connected. These experiences correspond to learners’ feelings about their own knowledge, their opinions about their own understanding, their perceptions of task difficulty, and their assessments of confidence and correctness when performing tasks. Numerous factors can influence learners’ metacognitive experiences: task complexity; prior experiences; personal attributes (e.g., cognitive ability, personality, and self-concept); and, of course, metacognitive knowledge. Efklides (Reference Efklides2006) further described metacognition as a higher-order cognitive model that interacts with object-level cognition through monitoring and control functions. The meta level receives input from the object level through monitoring, which then informs the control function to adapt cognitive processes accordingly. Metacognitive experiences are seen as complex inferential processes that reflect one’s progress towards a goal; this feedback is delivered in either an affective or cognitive context. These experiences are critical in activating affective or cognitive regulatory loops, in turn guiding self-regulatory mechanisms. Efklides (Reference Efklides2008) expanded on metacognition by specifying it across three domains in line with Flavell (Reference Flavell1979): metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive experiences, and metacognitive strategies. In particular, metacognitive experiences encompass one’s conscious awareness and feelings during information processing (e.g., the feeling of knowing, the effort involved, solutions’ accuracy, perceived difficulties, familiarity with the content, and personal confidence). These experiences are crucial for individuals to assess task performance. Metacognitive knowledge and experiences contribute to the monitoring aspect of cognition, while metacognitive skills pertain to its control. In the learning process, one’s metacognitive experiences – shaped by subjective and affective responses – can greatly affect one’s general metacognitive framework. For example, feelings such as satisfaction or anxiety can influence a learner’s future strategy use and shape their metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive experiences play a significant role in the classroom, where students display a range of emotions. Efklides (Reference Efklides2008) framed metacognition as a fully conscious endeavour, with people being entirely aware of their monitoring and control processes. She also argued that metacognition is individualised and that external factors minimally affect it; that is, metacognition represents a personal part of the learning process. The classification of metacognition’s sub-components is important. If this concept concerns both how one monitors and controls their own thinking, then it naturally covers a suite of phenomena (e.g., introspective and self-regulatory processes). It is accordingly necessary to identify distinguishable sub-components of metacognition. Certain facets – namely knowledge, strategies, and experiences – constitute a classic framework.

2.1.3 Key Theoretical Stances

The subject of metacognition has drawn substantial attention from researchers and educators in various disciplines given its relevance to learning, problem solving, reasoning, and conceptual understanding across learners, topics, domains, tasks, and contexts. However, the challenge of comprehending metacognition becomes apparent as different definitions, constructs, assumptions, processes, and mechanisms are proposed. Azevedo (Reference Azevedo2020) contended that, despite clear progress in this field, more theoretical work is needed to cohesively define metacognition and its constituent parts. Veenman, van Hout-Wolters, and Afflerbach (Reference Veenman, Van Hout-Wolters and Afflerbach2006) rightly stated that ‘while there is consistent acknowledgement of the importance of metacognition, inconsistency marks the conceptualisation of the construct’ (p. 4). Norman et al.’s (Reference Norman, Pfuhl and Saele2019) review identified major advancements in metacognition research and summarised the term’s definitions using three branches. The first branch revolves around the extent to which metacognition is a pre-conscious, pre-reflective, non-representational, or pre-verbal form of thinking. This line of enquiry explores the foundational aspects of metacognitive processes that occur before conscious awareness or introspection. The second branch shifts the focus from the mere existence of metacognitive thinking to understanding how people engage in metacognitive processes and proactively manage important tasks. This branch investigates the active regulation and control of cognitive processes through metacognition and explores how people monitor and alter their cognitive strategies to optimise learning and performance. The third branch concerns developmental aspects of metacognitive abilities across the lifespan, particularly whether these skills change with age. This research agenda considers how cognitive fluency and processing time may influence metacognitive functioning and whether metacognitive abilities decline in adulthood.

2.1.4 Reflection

Here, I have attempted to summarise metacognition based on themes and keywords from the literature. I hope this synthesis sheds light on the concept’s intricacies. First, metacognition is often described as ‘cognition about cognition’, meaning that metacognition involves thinking about personal cognitive processes. It goes beyond simply engaging in cognitive activities to being aware of and monitoring one’s thinking. Metacognition has also been deemed ‘information-based’, which suggests that various factors – including conscious and non-conscious ones – affect metacognitive processes. For example, the speed at which an answer comes to mind or a person’s familiarity with a task domain can shape metacognitive judgements. A dynamic interplay thus exists between conscious and non-conscious aspects of metacognition. Furthermore, metacognitive feelings are typically described as ‘experience-based’: these feelings refer to one’s subjective perceptions of their own cognitive processes and encompass elements such as the feeling of knowing, the effort involved in a task, solution accuracy, obstacles, content familiarity, and confidence. These experiences grant people valuable feedback on their cognitive performance. Metacognitive processes are conscious in both cases, as metacognition involves higher-order mental representations indicative of consciousness. People therefore need to be cognisant of their own thinking and to perform reflective processes that transcend automatic or non-conscious cognitive activities.

2.2.1 Definition of Metacognition in Language Teaching and Learning

The field of language teaching has increasingly acknowledged the role of metacognitive awareness for learners. Metacognitive awareness is crucial in language teaching and learning, especially in foreign-language and L2 education. Educators who prioritise cognitive strategies and self-directed language learning know the significance of incorporating metacognitive awareness into curricula. Researchers have investigated the link between metacognition and successful language learners (Anderson, Reference Anderson and Griffiths2008). Common tenets of metacognitive instructional models include activating students’ prior knowledge, reflecting on their knowledge and learning goals, explaining and modelling strategies (i.e., by the teacher), and involving students in setting goals for monitoring the learning process. The teacher plays a critical part in explaining, modelling, and creating an environment conducive to reflective discussions. However, metacognition has not yet received the attention it deserves within language teaching and learning.

Wenden (Reference Wenden1987) may be the first to highlight the roles of metacognition in language learning and teaching; he played a pioneering role in this field. Building on Flavell’s work, Wenden identified three types of metacognitive knowledge: person knowledge, task knowledge, and strategy knowledge. His contributions to the realm of metacognition in language learning and teaching underlined these categories’ importance. Person knowledge refers to one’s understanding of their cognitive processes, strengths, and weaknesses in relation to language learning. It involves self-awareness and self-reflection, allowing individuals to recognise their preferred learning styles, language aptitude, and motivation levels. By developing person knowledge, learners become more attuned to their own educational needs and can make informed decisions about their language learning approaches. Task knowledge pertains to the purpose, demands, and requirements of specific language learning tasks. It involves being able to evaluate task objectives and to identify the resources required for completion. Task knowledge enables learners to approach language learning tasks with a clear sense of what is expected and how to achieve desired outcomes. Strategy knowledge encompasses the awareness and use of learning techniques for effective language acquisition (e.g., to enhance language learning efficiency); this type of knowledge equips learners with a repertoire of strategies, such as note taking, summarising, self-assessment, and goal setting, so they may choose which tactics to employ in different language learning contexts. Learners who nurture these forms of metacognitive knowledge can take more active, autonomous roles in their language learning.

2.2.2 Frameworks on Understanding Metacognition in Language Teaching and Learning

In Wenden’s (Reference Wenden1998) framework, metacognitive knowledge should be viewed as a prerequisite for SRL. Such knowledge guides planning (i.e., early in one’s learning process) and monitoring processes as one moves through learning tasks. It comprises self-observation, assessment of progress and challenges, and decisions about remediation. Furthermore, metacognitive knowledge serves as a criterion for appraising a finished learning task. However, metacognitive knowledge alone may be insufficient for certain aspects of planning: domain knowledge plays a complementary and essential role. Metacognitive knowledge serves two distinct functions. First, it is motivational in that it energises the self-regulation involved in learning. Second, it is cognitively oriented because it directly moulds those processes. Language educators should acknowledge the significance of incorporating knowledge about learning into tasks designed to help language learners build learning strategies. People with strong metacognitive awareness are better prepared to face the obstacles inherent to second language learning. They also tend to demonstrate a firm belief in their ability to succeed in language learning and take proactive measures to realise their educational pursuits (Wenden, Reference Wenden1998). Recognising the role of metacognition in second language learning can hold value for second language acquisition. Numerous attributes, such as age, language aptitude, and motivation, can influence one’s extent of person-based knowledge. Bringing metacognitive awareness into language teaching and learning enables students to grapple with challenges, trust in their language learning skills, and work towards attaining associated goals.

The process of gaining declarative knowledge is closely related to metalinguistic awareness. Metalinguistic awareness refers to one’s ability ‘to consider language not just as a means of expressing ideas or communicating with others but also as an object of inquiry’ (Gass & Selinker, Reference Gass and Selinker2008, p. 359). It involves introspection about the structure, rules, and components of language itself. Learners possessing metalinguistic awareness can develop language awareness, which then enhances their metalinguistic awareness. Language awareness encompasses explicit knowledge of language and involves conscious perception and sensitivity to the learning, teaching, and use of language (Svalberg, Reference Svalberg2007). It goes beyond deploying language as a communication tool; people with language awareness have a conscious understanding of, and desire to explore, language’s structures, functions, and conventions. Within the area of metacognition, explicit knowledge about language learning processes falls under declarative metacognitive knowledge. This knowledge involves being aware of the strategies and principles that facilitate language learning (e.g., knowledge of learning techniques, learning styles, and language acquisition approaches). Declarative metacognitive knowledge enables individuals to deliberately reflect on their learning processes, make educated decisions about their learning tactics, and adapt these approaches to suit their needs. Learners obtain explicit knowledge about language structures and functions through metalinguistic awareness and language awareness. This understanding supports their metacognition concerning language learning processes, and they can navigate their language learning journey more effectively. Learners with explicit knowledge can also actively track their progress, measure their language proficiency, and choose language learning strategies wisely.

2.2.3 Key Theoretical Stances

There are some key theoretical stances regarding metacognition in language teaching and learning. Anderson (Reference Anderson2002, Reference Anderson and Griffiths2008) outlined five components of metacognition about learning to be developed in the language classroom: (1) preparing and planning for learning (i.e., students reflect on their goals and identify strategies to achieve them); (2) allowing students to make conscious decisions about their learning strategies and processes; (3) monitoring strategy use and encouraging students to track the effectiveness of their chosen techniques; (4) orchestrating diverse approaches (i.e., teaching students to combine multiple strategies); and (5) evaluating strategy use and learning (i.e., cyclically asking questions about goals, techniques used, and possible alternatives). Anderson emphasised that these components work together to enhance language learners’ metacognitive skills.

Rose (Reference Rose2012) criticised the current measurement of language learning strategies, arguing that available practices are usually unreliable. He called for clearer definitions of strategic learning and the development of more accurate and qualitative instruments to assess this construct. Rose further contended that it is essential to examine strategic learning not only based on a student’s self-regulation during a learning task but also in terms of their cognitive and behavioural strategies. Research frameworks that include both self-regulation and strategy use need to be explored to fully illustrate strategic learning. Additionally, theories must remain flexible to encourage new models of strategic learning. The need for strategic learning highlights the importance of metacognitive awareness in language teaching.

Haukås (Reference Haukås, Haukås, Bjørke and Dypedahl2018) defined metacognition as ‘an awareness of and reflections about one’s knowledge, experiences, emotions and learning in the contexts of language learning and teaching’ (p. 13). Haukås also linked metacognitive awareness with language awareness. Metacognition refers to broad reflections on one’s knowledge, experiences, emotions, and learning across all domains, whereas language awareness pertains to reflections in a trio of sub-domains: language, language learning, and language teaching. These domains are interconnected, and metacognition in language teaching often involves simultaneous reflection in all three. Investigations into teachers’ and learners’ beliefs, the use of learning strategies, metalinguistic and multilingual awareness, intercultural awareness, and self-efficacy all represent aspects of metacognition. Such analyses shed light on how people perform metacognitive processes in language learning and teaching contexts. By examining their own beliefs, students and teachers can gain insights into their personal cognitive processes, attitudes, and motivations around language learning. Learning strategy use involves metacognitive decision making, where people consciously choose and deploy techniques to enhance their language learning outcomes (Oxford, Reference Oxford1990). Metalinguistic and multilingual awareness concern one’s ability to scrutinise the structure, applications, and relationships between languages. Intercultural awareness entails reflecting on the cultural dimensions of language and communication. Finally, self-efficacy relates to one’s belief in their ability to succeed in language learning tasks (F. Teng, 2024d).

L. Teng and Zhang (Reference Teng and Zhang2022) asserted that self-regulation principles and metacognitive awareness practices can enrich L2/foreign language learning and teaching. L. Teng (Reference Teng2022) bridged SRL with language learning strategies, stressing the learning process and students’ pivotal roles within it. ‘SRL’ and ‘language learning strategies’ are multifaceted terms that include cognitive, metacognitive, social-behavioural, and motivational components. This rich framework allows for the incorporation of control mechanisms related to cognition, behaviour, the environment, and motivation. Scholars can therefore inspect various dimensions of learners’ SRL development. For instance, L. Teng (Reference Teng2024) pointed out the importance of exploring motivational regulation and social behaviour in L2 writing settings. The process of L2 writing can be evaluated through a multidimensional lens, including determining how learners set goals and subsequently regulate their cognition, motivation, and behaviour during the writing process. This point of view acknowledges that these components are often influenced by learners’ goals and diverse contextual features. Scholars and educators can gain valuable insights into the metacognitive aspects of language learning by considering these interconnected factors. L. Teng’s ideas reinforce the significance of metacognition in language learning and teaching. By contemplating the interplay between SRL and language learning strategies, educators can promote learners’ autonomy, self-regulation, and strategic thinking. This understanding fosters instructional interventions that support learners in becoming proficient language users. Metacognitive practices also convey the need to empower learners to be active participants in their own learning (i.e., by setting goals, tracking their progress, and adjusting when necessary). As Zhang and Zhang (Reference Zhang, Zhang and Liontas2018) said, metacognition – described as one’s awareness of oneself, the task at hand, employed strategies, and personal readiness – is fundamental to students’ agency and independence.

F. Teng et al. (Reference Teng, Qin and Wang2022) assembled a model to demystify metacognition, delineating this construct as the monitoring and control of cognition (see Figure 1). This framework maintains that metacognition operates on two principal levels: the observational level, where one tracks and assesses their cognitive activities; and the managerial level, where one fine-tunes these activities. This dual functionality underscores metacognition’s role in fostering one’s conscious awareness and mastery over cognitive functions. F. Teng et al. (Reference Teng, Qin and Wang2022) further separated metacognition into three stages – acquisition, retention, and retrieval – that connect the observational and managerial dimensions. The model posits that metacognition is complex and has three interwoven domains: metacognitive knowledge (awareness of one’s cognitive processes); metacognitive experiences (one’s lived subjective experience of cognition); and metacognitive skills (one’s application of strategies such as planning, monitoring, and evaluation). Central to this triad is the act of reflection, which is crucial for the cyclical process of planning, monitoring, and evaluating. F. Teng (Reference Teng, Wen, Adriana, Mailce and Teng2023a) expanded the discourse on metacognition by emphasising its deeply personal nature. F. Teng (Reference Teng, Wen, Adriana, Mailce and Teng2023a) noted that metacognition is not merely a set of abstract cognitive processes but a reflection of a person’s evolving understanding and command over their own thinking and learning. This attribute is pivotal in educational settings, therapeutic contexts, and self-improvement; it dictates how one approaches new information and challenges. F. Teng (Reference Teng, Wen, Adriana, Mailce and Teng2023a) also elaborated on the symbiotic relationship between the pillars of metacognition (i.e., metacognitive knowledge, experiences, and skills). Metacognitive knowledge – one’s understanding of their cognitive strengths, weaknesses, and strategies – is the basis upon which metacognitive experiences are built. These real-time, conscious experiences of cognition inform ongoing learning. Metacognitive skills, including the capacities to plan, monitor, and appraise one’s cognitive strategies, are honed through applying knowledge and reflecting on one’s experiences. Moreover, F. Teng (Reference Teng, Wen, Adriana, Mailce and Teng2023a) argued that this tripartite framework is not static but rather develops with practice. Individuals become more adept at deploying metacognitive strategies as they perform complex tasks, leading to a more sophisticated understanding of their learning processes. This iterative reflection and adaptation make metacognition a powerful ally in language learning.

Figure 1 Multifaceted elements of metacognition

(F. Teng et al., 2022, p. 171)

Another interesting aspect of metacognition is that it possesses trait-like and state-like elements (Sato, Reference Sato, Li, Hiver and Papi2022). This dichotomy is key for understanding how metacognitive abilities can vary between and within people over time. Metacognition, as a trait, refers to enduring qualities that define an individual’s usual approach to learning. Some learners naturally engage in metacognitive thinking more regularly than others. Numerous factors can contribute to this tendency, including prior educational experiences, personal dispositions towards reflection, and innate cognitive abilities. Trait-like metacognition is relatively stable across settings and tasks, shaping how a person typically interacts with new information and problem-solving situations. A trait-like metacognitive approach during language learning might manifest in the habitual use of specific techniques for planning, monitoring, and evaluating one’s own language development. Certain learners might consistently self-assess their progress in vocabulary acquisition or regularly reflect on their reading comprehension strategies. Conversely, the state of metacognition is more variable and context-dependent. A learner might exhibit strong metacognitive skills under particular circumstances (e.g., during a structured writing task where they are actively planning and revising their work) but not others (e.g., an impromptu speaking exercise). State-like metacognition is dynamic and can be enhanced or suppressed by issues such as stress, motivation, or perceived task difficulty. Language teachers can foster state-like metacognitive engagement among students by designing activities that prompt metacognitive thinking and by creating a classroom environment that encourages introspection and self-regulation.

F. Teng (Reference Teng2024a) proposed a framework (Figure 2) that elucidates the operational dynamics of students participating in virtual reality digital gaming. Central to this framework is an emphasis on metacognitive awareness for fostering learners’ autonomy and vice versa. The reciprocal relationship between metacognition and autonomy highlights individuals’ capacity to self-regulate and navigate learning experiences within virtual reality digital gaming contexts.

Figure 2 Metacognition and autonomy in virtual reality digital gaming

(F. Teng, Reference Teng2024a)

2.2.4 Reflection

In my attempt to summarise and understand the intricate dynamics of metacognition, I have come to realise that it is not merely an abstract concept but a practical tool that can transform the educational landscape. The increasing acknowledgement of metacognitive awareness in the field of language teaching highlights its necessity for learners to effectively harness their resources, identify linguistic challenges, and set achievable goals. This understanding resonates with my experiences in language education, where fostering metacognitive skills has proven essential in guiding students towards autonomy and success. The ability for students to reflect on their cognitive processes is crucial in enabling them to take charge of their learning journeys.

As an educator, I have witnessed first hand the transformative power of incorporating metacognitive strategies into curricula. It has become evident that when students are encouraged to activate prior knowledge, reflect on their learning goals, and engage in goal-setting, they develop a deeper understanding of their learning processes. This approach not only enhances their academic achievements but also prepares them for lifelong learning. The theoretical frameworks and insights have further enriched my understanding of how metacognitive awareness can be cultivated in language classrooms. The frameworks underscore the importance of creating a language learning environment where reflective discussions are encouraged, and where students are guided in developing their metacognitive skills. However, despite its recognised importance, metacognition still lacks the attention it deserves within language teaching and learning. This reflection has reinforced my commitment to advocating for its integration into language teaching and learning practices.

2.4.1 Metacognition and Age

The study of metacognition and its relationship to age has evolved over time. Early work in the 1970s mostly covered children’s metamemory and their understanding of person, task, and strategy variables. Scholars investigating theory of mind subsequently delved into children’s initial metacognitive knowledge, specifically the awareness of mental states such as desires and intentions. This exploration widened the scope of research to task-related cognitive processes meant to improve performance and track progress. Metacognition has been described as ‘knowledge about knowledge’, ‘thoughts about thoughts”, or “reflections about actions’, all of which typify its self-reflective nature (Weinert, Reference Weinert, Weinert and Kluwe1987, p. 8). Flavell (Reference Flavell1979) pointed out the interconnectedness between the three facets of metacognition, where metacognitive knowledge informs the selection and use of metacognitive skills for specific people and cognitive tasks.

Researchers have aimed to understand the critical period for the establishment of metacognitive awareness. Insights suggest that metacognitive thinking may begin as soon as infancy and continue to develop throughout early childhood (Brinck & Liljenfors, Reference Brinck and Liljenfors2013). Yet the matter of whether metacognitive abilities decline with age is up for debate. Interestingly, older adults have been found to outperform younger adults on some metacognitive tasks and can adapt and acquire metacognitive skills as needed (Pennequin et al., Reference Pennequin, Sorel and Mainguy2010). These patterns raise a question: are age-induced changes in metacognition primarily developmental or learning-related? Supplemental studies could clarify this issue (Hertzog, Reference Hertzog, Dunlosky and Tauber2016).

2.4.2 Metacognition and Cognition

Metacognition, which is often mistaken for cognition, is distinct among cognitive processes. It is the scientific study of one’s thinking about their own cognition, while cognition itself delves into aspects such as memory, attention, language comprehension, reasoning, learning, problem solving, and decision making. Metacognition’s multidimensionality enables people to acquire domain-related knowledge and regulatory skills, empowering them to control cognitive processes across multiple domains (Schraw, Reference Schraw and Hartman2001). In addition to its scientific definition, metacognition can be interpreted as one’s awareness of and reflection on their knowledge, experiences, emotions, and learning in all areas. This broad understanding emphasises the introspective character of metacognition and its potential impacts on self-regulation and self-directed learning. Flavell (Reference Flavell1979) distinguished between metacognitive and cognitive activities: the former category involves learners’ planning, reflecting, monitoring, and evaluation of their learning processes; the latter focuses on acquiring information, clarifying concepts, and engaging in complex mental tasks (e.g., planning and executing activities). This differentiation underlines the active, self-reflective nature of metacognition and its roles in refining learning strategies and metacognitive regulation.

One compelling argument for the importance of metacognition lies in teachability. Educators can employ numerous strategies to cultivate students’ metacognitive abilities. For instance, by using the ‘think-aloud’ method, instructors can guide students through problem solving while verbally expressing their thoughts and decision-making strategies. This technique allows learners to observe metacognitive processes in action and develop an understanding of productive problem solving. Modelling coping skills and resilience in the face of adversity is another powerful way to enhance metacognition. By demonstrating personal mistakes, perseverance, and adaptive strategies, educators provide students with insights into metacognitive regulation and the significance of metacognitive strategies. Engaging students in discussions about problem solving fosters metacognitive reflection. In being prompted to articulate their thought processes, students can better acknowledge their cognitive methods and refine those tactics accordingly. Concept mapping, reminder checklists, self-questioning, annotated drawings, and reciprocal teaching are additional ways to nurture metacognition. These techniques encourage students to actively deploy metacognitive processes, such as organising information, self-monitoring, and reflecting on personal learning strategies. However, cognition is not always easily taught.

2.4.3 Inconsistencies in Understanding Metacognition across Disciplines

Metacognition covers a range of areas that people control and monitor. Reasons for studying it vary by discipline. The field of early childhood studies stresses metacognitive activities related to managing human interaction and predicting the environmental conditions children are learning to navigate. This perspective recognises the importance of metacognition in social interaction and environmental adaptation during early development. Experimental cognitive psychology, in taking another tack, seeks to describe the information-processing antecedents underlying metacognitive feelings: researchers in this discipline strive to uncover the cognitive processes and mechanisms that give rise to metacognitive experiences and judgements (Koriat, Reference Koriat, Zelazo, Moscovich and Thompson2007). Cognitive neuropsychology assumes a different approach by investigating the brain regions involved in metacognitive processing. Through neuroscientific methods, scholars aim to identify the neural correlates and mechanisms behind metacognition (Fleming et al., Reference Fleming, Dolan and Frith2012). Personality psychology explores individual differences and their implications for metacognitive expression. Educational psychology emphasises metacognitive activities that facilitate effective learning and functioning in academic settings; this viewpoint strives to specify interventions that enhance learning outcomes and metacognitive regulation (Dimmitt & McCormick, Reference Dimmitt, McCormick, Harris, Graham and Urdan2012).

Metacognition also plays a crucial role in language teaching (Sato, Reference Sato, Li, Hiver and Papi2022; F. Teng, Reference Teng, Wen, Adriana, Mailce and Teng2023a; Zhang & Zhang, Reference Zhang, Zhang and Liontas2018). Language learners engage in metacognitive activities to monitor and regulate their language acquisition. These students are trained to be aware of their own language proficiency, set learning goals, plan study strategies, track their comprehension and production of language, and evaluate their progress. Metacognitive strategies in language learning involve reflecting on one’s language abilities, identifying areas of strength and weakness, and implementing appropriate techniques to improve one’s language skills. Relevant tactics may include self-questioning, self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-regulation.

3.2.1 How Can Metacognitive Instruction Facilitate Reading?

Metacognition plays a key part in reading and prompts particular questions: How do students’ monitoring and regulation processes influence their reading outcomes? More importantly, how can instruction support these reading processes? A major aspect of this field entails understanding who performs monitoring and regulation, when these processes occur, the environmental factors that stimulate them, and how they correlate to reading performance. Given the educational potential of metacognition, many studies have explored interventions designed to enhance reading skills – especially these treatments’ impacts on students’ reading abilities (e.g., Urban et al., Reference Urban, Urban and Nietfeld2023).

Metacognitive instruction, which can be broadly defined as pedagogical approaches aimed at improving domain-general, higher-order thinking processes in reading, seeks to develop in students self-regulatory strategies that foster engaged, strategic, and metacognitive comprehension. Yet teachers often face challenges to the scaffolded incorporation of reading strategies into daily classroom instruction. Planning is a critical stage preceding reading: strategic readers establish goals (e.g., remembering or comprehension), scan the text to gather information about it, activate prior knowledge, choose suitable strategies, allocate sufficient resources (e.g., reading time), and predict outcomes (Pressley & Gaskins, Reference Pressley and Gaskins2006). However, teachers in classroom settings are often ill equipped to impart such strategies to students. The goal of strategy instruction is to gradually transfer responsibility for selecting, applying, monitoring, and evaluating strategy use from teachers to students. Classroom teachers’ under-preparedness to fulfil this objective hampers metacognitive strategy implementation and undermines students’ potential to become independent, proficient readers.

3.2.2 When to Facilitate Metacognitive Instruction for Reading?

Metacognitive knowledge heavily contributes to the longitudinal development of young learners’ reading and writing skills (F. Teng & Zhang, Reference Teng and Zhang2021). While children rely on rehearsal strategies in the early stages of reading, by fourth grade, they become more capable of actively managing their reading and adopting complex cognitive strategies if given strategy instruction (Baker, Reference Baker, Israel, Block, Bauserman and Kinnucan-Welsch2015). F. Teng (Reference Teng2020a) lent support to these findings, documenting that young learners move from an initial reliance on reading and completing exercises to being aware of a wider repertoire of factors influencing their reading. F. Teng (Reference Teng2020a) particularly focused on fifth-grade learners in Hong Kong.

An important consideration in metacognitive instruction for reading is the age at which it should be introduced and how it should be implemented. Metacognitive accuracy may vary with age: younger adults tend to have higher metacognitive accuracy in assessing their cognitive capacity, whereas older adults excel in evaluating their ability to selectively remember information (Urban et al., Reference Urban, Urban and Nietfeld2023). This discrepancy suggests there may be separate metacognitive mechanisms which aging differentially affects.

Some people need to devote more cognitive effort to specific tasks as they age, and their cognitive resources may deplete more quickly while doing so. Older adults might then become more discerning when choosing tasks that warrant cognitive resources; this deliberation can be seen as an adaptive response to the reduced cognitive resources available for reading. To explore age-related differences in metacognitive processes, it is advisable to gather evidence on reading strategies’ efficacy among young and adult EFL learners by examining the techniques that these groups employ. Creative methods (e.g., reading and writing workshops, reflections, group discussions, and metacognitive strategy instruction) can also be compared.

3.2.3 How to Facilitate Metacognitive Instruction for Reading?

Another crucial aspect is how to facilitate metacognitive instruction for reading. Several factors need to be addressed, including the training sequencing and duration, task selection for teaching and training, instructional delivery (e.g., chosen models), and applicable transfer tasks and assessments (Azevedo, Reference Azevedo2020). The sequencing of training refers to the order in which metacognitive knowledge and skills for reading are taught. A sequence may begin with declarative knowledge (i.e., about strategies and processes), followed by procedural knowledge (i.e., about how to use strategies) and then conditional knowledge (i.e., about when and why to use them). This structure allows learners to develop a solid foundation of metacognitive awareness in reading. The length of training regimens is another consideration. Declarative knowledge typically develops more quickly than procedural or conditional knowledge; therefore, the time required to master each form of knowledge may vary.

Learners need sufficient time and practice to internalise metacognitive strategies and apply them effectively. Task selection is also central to teaching and training. Teachers must decide whether to use the same tasks for a specific topic or in different domains. Relatedly, teachers may consider using isomorphic tasks that share underlying structures across topics or domains. Selecting suitable tasks helps build metacognitive awareness and facilitates skill transfer to various reading contexts. The question of who or what should deliver reading instruction and training is important to ponder, too. Options include teachers, parents, peers, experts, or even artificial agents such as virtual humans or robots. The optimal approach might involve a combination of human and artificial agents, leveraging the unique strengths of each to enhance metacognitive instruction. The chosen instructional model will ultimately guide training. The method could entail expert modelling while students engage in vicarious learning, followed by practice using acquired metacognitive knowledge with adaptive scaffolding from experts. Once mastery is demonstrated, scaffolding can gradually decrease, such that learners slowly begin to use metacognitive strategies independently. This cycle can then be repeated for subsequent reading areas to foster domain-general and domain-specific metacognitive skills. New transfer tasks and assessments need to be developed to monitor learners’ acquisition, internalisation, retention, retrieval, use, and transfer of metacognitive knowledge for reading comprehension. These tasks should measure learners’ ability to deploy metacognitive strategies in different reading contexts in addition to tracking overall metacognitive awareness.

4.2.1 To What Extent Do Metacognitive Strategies Predict Writing?

A critical issue in writing-related research is determining the extent to which metacognitive strategies predict writing performance. The above-mentioned studies largely focused on strategies associated with metacognitive knowledge and regulation. However, these strategies’ definitions may have overlap, which could confuse readers. For instance, even though techniques like planning, monitoring, and evaluating are routinely discussed, their applications can vary. Some scholars might categorise text-processing skills under metacognitive regulation, while others consider these capacities part of procedural knowledge. This inconsistency in terminology and classification can make it challenging to draw conclusions about each strategy’s contributions.

Moreover, although the predictive effects of metacognitive strategies are well-documented, the mechanisms through which these strategies influence writing performance are not always clearly articulated. For example, how do strategies like motivational self-talk and emotional control specifically enhance the writing process? What roles do feedback-related strategies play in fostering better writing outcomes? Another point of deliberation is the context in which these strategies are used. Research involving multimedia environments, traditional classroom settings, and AI-assisted writing platforms may yield distinct insights into the effectiveness of metacognitive strategies. These techniques’ transferability across learning situations continues to merit exploration. More longitudinal studies are also needed to track how metacognitive strategy instruction affects writing performance in the long term. Most studies have concentrated on short-term interventions and their immediate effects, leaving a gap in our comprehension of how these strategies influence writing development over time.

The final concern is the reliance on self-report data to assess metacognitive strategy use. Self-report measures can be subjective and may not actually reflect learners’ behaviours or cognitive processes. Students might overestimate or underestimate their use of metacognitive strategies due to social desirability bias, limited self-awareness, or misconstrued survey items. These possibilities cast doubt on findings’ validity and whether self-report instruments truly capture respondents’ experiences.

4.2.2 To What Extent Is Metacognitive Training Effective for Writing?

Another core issue is determining the extent to which metacognitive training helps improve writing skills. Research has revealed numerous positive effects of metacognitive training on writing performance; however, several uncertainties remain, particularly regarding how best to apply these findings in diverse classroom settings. Much of the intervention research conducted thus far has included specific, often brief training periods. These studies typically measure immediate or short-term gains in writing performance, leaving ambiguities about the long-term sustainability of the benefits derived from metacognitive training. Without longitudinal data, it is difficult to ascertain whether the improvements seen in these studies will endure over time or wane once the training period concludes.

Another point of interest is participant homogeneity. Most samples contained individuals with similar proficiency – usually higher than the intermediate level. It is therefore unclear whether the results are generalisable to a range of learners, particularly those at lower proficiency levels. It is similarly uncertain whether the metacognitive strategies that are effective for intermediate or advanced learners will be equally beneficial for beginners or for students struggling with foundational writing skills.

Furthermore, the controlled environments in which these studies have been performed may not accurately reflect the complexities of real-world settings. In classroom teaching, educators encounter myriad student needs, levels of motivation, and learning contexts, all of which can inform the effectiveness of metacognitive training. The structured and often ideal conditions in research studies may not capture the unpredictability of real teaching. Scholars still need to explore how metacognitive training can be brought into existing curricula and teaching practices. Teachers may require targeted training and resources to successfully implement metacognitive strategies in their classrooms. The scalability of such interventions and their adaptability to various educational contexts warrant further investigation.

The final factor that impacts the reliability of findings in the role of metacognitive training on writing could be the diversified test on writing. This means that the way writing ability is assessed can significantly influence the outcomes of studies on metacognitive training. Diversified testing involves using a variety of assessment types and formats to evaluate writing skills, which can include timed essays, reflective journals, research papers, and creative writing tasks, among others.

5.2.1 The Extent of Metacognitive Facilitation for Listening

One critical issue lies in the extent of metacognitive facilitation for listening. The aforementioned studies encapsulate the significant impact of metacognitive instruction on listening. Importantly, though, listening comprehension transcends auditory perception. It involves a sophisticated set of cognitive abilities with which learners can discern critical information, unravel subtle meanings, and infer context from a diverse array of spoken cues. Its importance is rooted not just in language comprehension but in broader communicative competence and intercultural insight. Thus, EFL students must adeptly engage with the complexities of spoken English. This capacity manifests from several facets: engaging assertively and dynamically in dialogues and discussions, internalising sophisticated vocabulary, grasping complicated syntactic constructions, emulating authentic pronunciation patterns, and understanding the cultural peculiarities of English-speaking communities.

Applying metacognitive strategies for EFL listening instruction signifies an educational shift towards autonomous learning. These strategies involve advanced cognitive skills encompassing self-awareness, regulatory control, and deliberate orchestration of one’s learning activities, which jointly contribute to listening performance (Vandergrift & Goh, Reference Vandergrift and Goh2012). While this step is important, the critical issue is not merely instruction-oriented; a key question is how to integrate these strategies to suit specific listening requirements. Each metacognitive strategy should be tailored to the needs of listening tasks. For instance, when highlighting personal knowledge, people must be able to access their pre-existing repository of information, experiences, and convictions through metacognitive knowledge. Despite researchers advocating for metacognitive training, the literature has insufficiently considered how each strategy aligns with listening-related tasks. It is crucial to teach students how to home in on the linguistic elements of spoken English to capture crucial auditory information. Metacognitive strategies thus need to be incorporated into particular listening activities to be effective.

• Accessing Prior Knowledge: Encourage students to draw on their knowledge and experiences before listening to a new piece of audio.

• Monitoring Understanding: Teach students to continually check their comprehension during listening in order to identify and address gaps in understanding.

• Evaluating Performance: Guide students in assessing their listening performance after completing a task (e.g., by reflecting on which strategies worked and which could be improved).

• Planning and Setting Goals: Help students set specific listening goals and plan how to achieve them (e.g., focusing on understanding the main ideas or specific details).

However, metacognitive facilitation for listening can be influenced by several factors, impacting how effectively individuals employ strategies to enhance their listening skills. Learners’ prior knowledge and experience play a crucial role, as those with more exposure to the language or specific content may apply metacognitive strategies more effectively (Vandergrift & Goh, Reference Vandergrift and Goh2012). Motivation and attitude are also significant; highly motivated learners are more likely to engage in planning, monitoring, and evaluating their listening processes, leading to better outcomes (Graham, Reference Graham2006). The cognitive load of listening material can affect facilitation, as overly complex content might overwhelm cognitive resources, hindering strategy application (Sweller, Reference Sweller1988). Instructional support, particularly explicit teaching and modelling of strategies, enhances learners’ self-regulation abilities (O’Malley & Chamot, Reference O’Malley and Chamot1990). Environmental factors, such as noise and distractions, can impede concentration and strategy use, making a conducive listening environment essential (Rost, Reference Rost2016). Finally, individual differences, including age, cognitive abilities, and personality traits, can affect strategy use, with those possessing higher working memory capacity potentially managing strategies more effectively (Baddeley, Reference Baddeley2003). Understanding these factors can aid educators in designing effective listening instruction that supports metacognitive strategy development, thereby improving listening comprehension and language proficiency.

5.2.2 Metacognitive Strategies for Listening

Metacognitive strategies are of paramount importance in listening instruction. New information is encountered in the classroom nearly every day. However, students cannot always figure out how new material connects to what has already been covered – or even whether something that they know is important to think about. For many teachers, presenting a new lesson can just feel like adding another disembodied idea or concept to the mix. Students then tend to absorb knowledge passively by taking notes without thinking critically. Even though each new lesson introduces fresh information, if that material seems disjointed from prior learning, it can become overwhelming.

Metacognitive strategies matter for listening because it involves understanding, on a larger scale, how ideas build upon each other. Teachers should realise that an intentional continuum exists, which stretches through units and proficiency levels, linking to existing background knowledge. This approach helps build deeper, more durable knowledge and encourages students to take ownership of their own learning, especially in listening. Many teachers’ instructional practices lack metacognitive awareness. Even teachers who possess some degree of metacognitive awareness often separate metacognitive training from listening instruction. They may focus on instilling in students the metacognitive habits to actively reflect on one’s learning process with the aim of developing self-sufficient learners. However, it is equally important to train students to grapple with new material through a reflection on metacognitive strategies. Then they can see how newly introduced information fits into the puzzle of what they already know, solidifies concepts, or reveals gaps in their knowledge.

To help students build the metacognitive habits necessary to evaluate new materials and make sense of them, the following metacognitive strategies may help.

• Connecting New Material to Prior Knowledge: Explicitly show students how new information connects to what they have previously learnt. This practice will help students see the bigger picture and understand the relevance of new content.

• Encourage Active Reflection: Prompt students to reflect on their learning process, such as by asking them to consider how new information fits with their existing knowledge and what strategies they have applied to understand it.

• Facilitate Critical Thinking: Encourage students to analyse new material, helping them to identify key information and its significance for listening comprehension.

• Model Metacognitive Strategies: Demonstrate how to use metacognitive strategies in listening tasks, such as when predicting content, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating understanding.

• Provide Scaffolding: Offer support while students practice metacognitive strategies, gradually reducing assistance as they become more proficient.

However, implementing metacognitive strategies in writing presents several critical challenges. A primary issue is the lack of awareness and training among educators and students, which can lead to a superficial application of these strategies without a deep understanding of their purpose. Integrating metacognitive strategies into an already packed curriculum is another hurdle, often resulting in these strategies being sidelined. Student engagement is crucial but can be difficult to achieve, as some students may resist introspection or fail to see the immediate benefits. Additionally, traditional assessment methods may not effectively capture improvements in metacognitive skills, complicating the feedback process. The diverse needs of learners further complicate implementation, as a one-size-fits-all approach is rarely effective. Time constraints in educational settings also pose a barrier, as developing metacognitive skills requires practice, reflection, and feedback. Finally, resource limitations, such as insufficient training materials and professional development opportunities, can lead to inconsistent application across classrooms.

6.2.1 Lack of Attention to Metacognitive Strategies for Vocabulary Learning

As is apparent, people can employ a variety of strategies to learn L2 vocabulary. Several scholars have developed taxonomies of available techniques, with O’Malley and Chamot’s (Reference O’Malley and Chamot1990) and Oxford’s (Reference Oxford1990) frameworks being the most highly cited. These taxonomies differentiate between cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Cognitive strategies relate to how learners process the target lexical items. From a practical standpoint, cognitive strategies can be seen as ‘hands-on’ methods, such as using flashcards as a study tool. Metacognitive strategies, on the other hand, are higher-order approaches concerned with the regulation of learning. These strategies are normally associated with reflective practice and can be sub-categorised into planning, monitoring, and evaluating learning.

One critical issue in vocabulary instruction is the frequent use of cognitive strategies – often to the neglect of metacognitive options. Many students lack metacognitive strategies to seek out opportunities for practice and to plan their learning, such as deciding when and how frequently to review items in their vocabulary notebooks. That is not to say that metacognitive strategies are inherently more effective than cognitive ones. However, the awareness and application of metacognitive strategies are noticeably absent from vocabulary learning compared with other language-learning domains (e.g., reading and writing). Teachers, especially in EFL settings, tend to rely heavily on grammar translation and exam-oriented methods. Even when cognitive techniques like flashcards are used, students often remain passive in their learning rather than taking active roles.

Students may be active in rote-memorising a large number of words, but this method should not be suggested as a primary means of vocabulary learning. Vocabulary instruction should be part of a well-balanced language course composed of four equal strands: meaning-focused input, meaning-focused output, language-focused learning, and fluency development (Nation, Reference Nation2007). Teachers and learners both need to build metacognitive awareness in order to strike this balance. Being able to integrate and use cognitive and metacognitive strategies will allow for a more comprehensive, autonomous approach to vocabulary learning.

6.2.2 Use Reflective Questions to Foster Metacognitive Awareness for Vocabulary Learning

Another critical issue in vocabulary learning is the use of reflective questions to foster metacognitive awareness. Promoting metacognition among students is primarily achieved through posing reflective questions (Teng & Reynolds, Reference Teng and Reynolds2019). Although teachers mostly employ these as a rounding-off activity, the questions can also be used to encourage metacognitive awareness at all three stages of learning: planning, monitoring, and evaluating. For that reason, reflective questions can serve a variety of purposes in the classroom, enhancing the overall learning experience. These types of questions encourage reflection about the learning of vocabulary items so students start to think deeply about this process.

However, it is often unclear which methods learners apply to reach goals. Reflective questions can be easily incorporated into classroom activities – even in core course components. For instance, these questions could be featured as prompts in a reflective journal or as short-answer questions on tests or assignments. Additionally, when demonstrating metacognitive strategies, teachers could respond to these questions as part of a think-aloud task to model metacognitive practices for students. Unfortunately, many teachers are unaware of how to apply reflective questions at each point of the learning process. Such questions tend to appear intermittently (i.e., within individual lessons) instead of as part of an all-encompassing evaluation strategy. This somewhat fragmented implementation means that students seldom develop a complete understanding of how to plan, monitor, and assess their vocabulary learning through reflective questions.

To address this issue, teachers need to consistently infuse reflective questions into the learning process, such as by making them a regular part of vocabulary instruction. This integration will help students engage more thoroughly with learning strategies, leading to greater metacognitive awareness and more effective vocabulary acquisition. By encouraging regular reflection, students can become more autonomous learners; they will therefore be better prepared to manage their vocabulary learning in a structured, self-regulated manner.

7.1.1 Metacognition Scale in Educational Psychology

7.1.2 Language-Learning Strategies

7.1.3 Metacognition Scale for Listening

7.1.4 Metacognition scale for reading

7.1.5 Metacognition scale for writing

7.1.6 Metacognition Scale for Vocabulary Learning

7.1.7 Metacognitive Knowledge (MCK) Test for Young Learners’ Foreign Language Learning

F. Teng and Zhang (Reference Teng and Zhang2024) validated a metacognitive knowledge (MCK) test for young learners’ foreign language learning. This test comprises thirty tasks, each designed with three distinct scenarios, resulting in a holistic assessment that covers a range of metacognitive strategies relevant to foreign language learning. To help young learners better understand the tasks and verbalise their metacognitive strategies, three black-and-white drawings are presented to illustrate the situations. EFA was employed to distil the essence of metacognitive knowledge, suggesting that memory, learning, and comprehension strategies are interconnected through higher-order metacognitive understanding. CFA provided statistical confirmation of the model’s fit, indicating that a single overarching factor of metacognitive knowledge accounts for the correlations observed among memory (8 items), learning (4 items), and comprehension strategies (12 items).

7.2.1 Doubts about Overrelying on Learners’ Self-Report Data

Assessing metacognitive awareness presents significant challenges, particularly in the realm of testing. One critical issue is an overreliance on learners’ self-report data. Self-report questionnaires, while convenient and easy to administer, often fail to capture the extent of learners’ internal cognitive and emotional processes. Learners may struggle to articulate their thoughts and feelings, leading to incomplete or biased responses. Additionally, learners’ language proficiency can influence their answers, potentially skewing results and not reflecting respondents’ genuine metacognitive awareness.

Despite these limitations, self-report questionnaires remain popular due to their practicality. Alternative methods, such as think-aloud protocols (i.e., where learners verbalise their thought processes while engaging in a task), can provide more detailed data. However, these procedures are usually challenging to administer; they require considerable time and resources. Researchers instead tend to favour more straightforward approaches such as surveys, using conventional statistical techniques like EFA and CFA for validation purposes.

Several strategies can be employed to enhance the validity of surveys assessing metacognitive awareness. First, mixed-method approaches can provide a more comprehensive understanding. For example, combining self-report questionnaires with qualitative methods such as interviews or think-aloud protocols can help triangulate data and offer deeper insights into learners’ metacognitive processes. Second, ensuring questionnaire items’ clarity and relevance is crucial. Items should be designed to be understood by learners of varying proficiency levels and should target specific aspects of metacognitive awareness. Piloting a questionnaire with a small group of learners and refining items based on respondents’ feedback can help improve the instrument’s reliability and validity. Third, adopting technology to facilitate data collection can also enhance validity. For instance, using digital tools that allow learners to record their thoughts in real time during language tasks can provide more precise, immediate reflections of metacognitive strategies. Finally, ongoing training for researchers and educators in administering and interpreting these assessments is essential. Ensuring that those involved in the research process are well-versed in the nuances of metacognitive assessment can mitigate biases and improve overall data quality.

7.2.2 Lack of Attention to Assessing Young Learners’ Metacognitive Awareness

Another critical issue in the assessment of metacognitive awareness is the disproportionate focus on university students or adults to the relative neglect of young learners. While evaluating young learners’ metacognitive awareness presents unique challenges, it is nonetheless important – and, in fact, urgently necessary. A key reason for this imbalance is the difficulty in creating and administering assessments suitable for young learners. Children may have limited abilities to reflect on and describe their cognitive processes, reducing the effectiveness of traditional self-report questionnaires. However, this issue should not deter researchers from pursuing this line of enquiry. It in fact highlights the need to devise age-appropriate methods for evaluating young learners’ metacognitive awareness.

Longitudinal studies by F. Teng and Zhang (Reference Teng and Zhang2021, Reference Teng and Zhang2022, Reference Teng and Zhang2024a) have demonstrated that young learners’ initial levels of metacognitive knowledge are significantly related to later development in this area. These findings suggest that early metacognitive awareness can have lasting impacts on learners’ cognitive and academic growth. Therefore, researchers must pay more attention to early stages of metacognitive development.