www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

Introduction

Omani students have participated in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study

(TIMSS) since 2007, but have consistently scored lower than the cut-off point throughout that time

(Mullis et al., 2020). While little is known about the factors affecting Omani students’ performance in

TIMSS, internationally the TIMSS has gained the interest of a number of researchers (Kang and Cogan,

2020), resulting in a growing body of research exploring the factors associated with TIMSS test-taking

(Chiu, 2012; Kang and Cogan, 2022; Ruthven, 2011; Tighezza, 2014; Wang and Liou, 2018). According

to several studies, one of the main factors affecting student performance in science is metacognition

(Casselman and Atwood, 2017; Hong, Bernacki and Perera, 2020; Oyelekan, Jolayemi and Upahi, 2019;

Wang and Chen, 2014; Wang et al., 2014).

Metacognition has attracted a range of researchers since the term rst appeared in the literature

in the 1970s. The scientist who rst developed metacognitive theory dened it as individuals’ awareness

of their mental and cognitive processes and the way they affect performance (Flavell, 1979); other

researchers have described it as involving the ability to reect on one’s own thinking, and to monitor and

control its progress in order to achieve the goals one desires (Brown et al., 1983; Efklides, 2011; Larkin,

2006; Tang et al., 2016). Metacognition has also been explained as the process of thinking about one’s

own thinking, a skill which is believed to promote higher-order thinking (Adey, 1999).

Research into the brain has shown that there is an executive control mechanism in the pre-frontal

cortex; this is known as “inhibitory control” and is responsible for metacognition. This mental mechanism

Metacognitive Awareness Perceptions of Students with High and Low

Scores on TIMSS-Like Science Tests

Sulaiman M. Al-Balushi

, Ibrahim S. Al-Harthy

, Rashid S. Almehrizi

, Abdullah K. Ambusiaidi

Khadija A. Al-Balushi

, Khalid K. Al-Saadi

, Mohammed Al-Aghbari

, Moza Al-Balushi

College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman,

e-mail: sbalushi@squ.edu.om, mehrzi@squ.edu.om, saadi@squ.edu.om, malaghbari@squ.edu.om

Quality Assurance & Enhancement, National University of Science & Technology, Muscat, Oman,

e-mail: ibrahimsa@nu.edu.om

Ministry of Education, Muscat, Oman, e-mail: ambusaidi40@hotmail.com, khadija.belushi@gmail.com, al_balushim@hotmail.com

Abstract: The current study explores the differences in metacognitive awareness perceptions of students who had high

and low scores on TIMSS-like science tests. The sample consisted of 937 Omani students, 478 in Grade Five and 459 in Grade

Nine. TIMSS-like tests were specially designed for both grade levels, and students also completed a metacognitive awareness

perceptions inventory which explored their use of four main skills: planning, information management strategies, debugging

strategies and evaluation. MANOVA was used to analyze the data. The ndings indicated that students with high scores in the

TIMSS-like test out-performed students with low scores in the test on all four metacognitive skills surveyed. This was true for all

three performance areas analysed: performance in the TIMSS-like test as a whole, performance in lower-level test questions and

performance in higher-level test questions. These ndings highlight the extent to which students’ metacognitive skills inuence

their performance in science tests. The study recommends that students be trained to improve their metacognitive skills, reviews

several methods for doing this, and suggests that such training might better prepare them for taking science tests. However,

it also notes that further research is needed to explore the impact of metacognitive training on student performance in specic

science examinations such as TIMSS.

Keywords: debugging, evaluation, information management, metacognition, planning, science, TIMSS.

Original scientic paper

Received: June, 06.2022.

Revised: August, 24.2022.

Accepted: September, 07.2022.

UDK:

159.922-057.875

159.955.07-057.875

10.23947/2334-8496-2022-10-3-73-82

Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Corresponding author: sbalushi@squ.edu.om

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

is believed to play a crucial role in inhibiting any initially ineffective or inappropriate response we might

have and in guiding us to accept a more fruitful and powerful one (Larkin, 2010). The value of this ability

to inhibit initial responses allows an individual to plan effectively. It does this by enhancing their capacity

to assess prior knowledge retrieved from long-term memory, to mediate the construction of meaning in the

working memory, and also to accommodate new knowledge into existing knowledge networks (Al-Harthy,

2016; Larkin, 2010; Wang and Chen, 2014).

The impact of metacognition on learning and academic achievement has been solidly established

in research literature; it has been positively linked to improved levels of learning, intelligence, problem-

solving, and decision-making (Al-Harthy, 2016; Balashov et al., 2020; Larkin, 2006; Lee et al., 2012;

Mahdavi, 2014; Sari Faradiba et al., 2019; Was and Al-Harthy, 2015). Several studies argue that students

with a high level of metacognition are able to decide what they need to learn, and can also control their

thinking processes and act in ways that will help them achieve their intended goals. In addition, when a

course of study or a topic area emphasizes different metacognitive practices from those they know, they

are able to develop reexive problem-solving strategies (Al-Harthy, Was and Hassan, 2015; Balashov et

al., 2020; Rahman and Hussan, 2017; Efklides, 2011; Jaleel and Premachandran, 2016; Joseph, 2010;

Lee et al., 2012; Liu and Liu , 2020; Mahdavi, 2014; Shubber, Udin and Minghat, 2015; Sutiyatno and

Sukarno, 2019; Tok, Özgan and Döş, 2010). Metacognitive ability also makes students aware of their

learning progress; they are thus able to reect on what they have accomplished and decide how they

need to go about completing their learning tasks, a process which requires the use of mental skills such as

planning, monitoring and evaluation (Efklides, 2011; Wiley and Guss, 2007; Hong, Bernacki and Perera,

2020; Jaleel and Premachandran, 2016; Joseph, 2010; Miller and Geraci, 2011; Santelmann, Stevens

and Martin, 2018; Sutiyatno and Sukarno, 2019).

A good deal of research has examined the relationship between students’ metacognition and their

attainment of academic goals, and has shown clearly that greater use of metacognitive skills is associated

with an improved awareness of what students are studying. It has also been linked with greater attainment

of their learning goals, improved reading comprehension, and enhanced independent learning skills (Al-

Harthy, Was and Hassan, 2015; Coutinho, 2007; Jaleel and Premachandran, 2016; Rahman and Hussan,

2017; López-Vargas Ibáñez-Ibáñez and Racines-Prada, 2017; Meniado, 2016; Moir, Boyle and Woolfson,

2020; Shubber, Udin and Minghat, 2015; Sutiyatno and Sukarno, 2019; Zhao, 2014). As far back as

1983, Brown et al. (1983) had demonstrated signicantly that several metacognitive strategies, including

self-regulation, planning, evaluating, and monitoring, are relevant to reading comprehension. Baker and

Brown (1984) argued similarly that anyone engaging in reading comprehension must be able to process

their cognitive activities, and that most of this involves metacognition. Another interesting point arising

from the research is that metacognitive scaffolding seems to lower the cognitive load during the time that

an individual is involved in learning tasks (López-Vargas Ibáñez-Ibáñez and Racines-Prada, 2017); by the

same token, experiencing learning anxiety during a problem-solving process might lead to metacognitive

blindness (Sari Faradiba et al., 2019).

In science education, studies have indicated a positive association between metacognitive

awareness and student achievement (Hong, Bernacki and Perera, 2020; Oyelekan, Jolayemi and Upahi,

2019). Metacognition has also been linked to improvements in problem-solving skills (Akben, 2020; Aurah,

Cassady and McConnell, 2014), in reective thinking skills (Antonio, 2020), in science inquiry learning

(Tang et al., 2016), in comprehension of science texts (Wang and Chen, 2014; Wang et al., 2014), and

in performance on exams (Casselman and Atwood, 2017). There have been other interesting ndings;

if metacognitive training is carried out continually throughout a semester, it is more likely to improve

students’ ability to assess their test scores (Al-Harthy, Was and Hassan, 2015; Casselman and Atwood,

2017), and the use of metacognitive prompts during test-taking improves student test scores (Aurah,

Cassady and McConnell, 2014). Research also shows that students with high test scores are better able

to accurately predict their scores, an important metacognitive skill, than are lower-performing students

(Hawker, Dysleski and Rickey., 2016). While students are actually taking a test, they use a range of

metacognitive strategies to answer test questions; these include eliminating incorrect options, underlining

the clues found in the question text, and re-examining their answers. The metacognitive strategies used

vary according to the nature and features of the test items (e.g. narrative, gures and graphics) (Diken,

2020). However, in spite of the growing body of research supporting the positive impact of metacognition on

learning, some studies indicate that students do not regularly practice meta-cognitive skills while actually

carrying out learning tasks (McCabe, 2011; Santelmann, Stevens and Martin, 2018; Siagian, Saragih and

Sinaga 2019; Saenz, Geraci and Tirso, 2019). This could be partly because there is little focus on these

skills within the classrooms where they study, and a lack of coverage of metacognition in the curriculum

materials used (Jaleel and Premachandran, 2016; Joseph, 2010). Overall, though, research shows that

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

metacognitive mental skills characterize high-performing achievers and more advanced students (Larkin,

2006). Other research also reports, interestingly, that metacognition develops with practice and also

through interaction with others, and that it is these factors which impact individuals’ consciousness of

their cognitive processing (Balashov et al., 2020; Larkin, 2006).

There are several general learning theories which have a bearing on the role of metacognitive

thinking, which is sometimes seen as a kind of private speech that takes place in children’s minds.

One of these is Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, which stresses the importance of private speech to

the development of learning. Another is Piaget’s cognitive theory, which emphasizes the importance of

meta-thinking in the comprehension of abstract concepts and phenomena; this meta-thinking is a type of

metacognition that happens in a later stage of a learner’s development (Bates, 2019). A third theoretical

perspective that helps to explain the association between learning and metacognitive skills is the cognitive

acceleration theory proposed by Shayer and Adey (2002), and heavily reliant on the ideas introduced by

Piaget and Vygotsky. A key principle of cognitive acceleration theory is the emphasis on asking learners

to explain their thinking process to their peers, telling them how they solve the problems at hand. This

lays the ground for the belief that social interaction accelerates learning (Shayer and Adey, 2002), with

the group conversation allowing learners to articulate how they think, organize their thoughts, and benet

from others’ techniques of tackling different problems, so that they come to visualize their thinking in a

sophisticated way (Oliver and Venville, 2015). Other research also shows that the social construction of

metacognition is best done while students are actually engaging in the task, rather than when reecting

on their thinking after the task has been completed (Larkin, 2010).

Purpose of study

Understanding the cognitive factors which affect Omani students’ performance in the TIMSS has

become particularly important to science education research in the country; metacognition is one of these

factors, and, if investigated, will provide a better understanding of its role in student test performance in

general. It is with this purpose in mind that the current study explores the differences in metacognitive

awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores in TIMSS-like science tests. Also, although

there have been a growing number of studies investigating student metacognition while they carry out

learning tasks, studies investigating the association between student metacognition during test taking

and their performance on tests have been very rare, especially in the area of science education. To

the knowledge of the authors, there has been no study that explored the association between student

metacognition and performance in TIMSS; the current study is an attempt to address this gap in the

research literature.

The main research question of the current study is therefore:

What are the differences in the metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low

scores on TIMSS-like science tests?

Three sub-questions stem from this main research question:

1. Do metacognitive perceptions differ for students with high and low scores in TIMSS-like science

tests for Grades Five and Nine?

2. Do metacognitive perceptions differ for students with high and low scores in lower-level questions

of TIMSS-like science test for Grades Five and Nine?

3. Do metacognitive perceptions differ for students with high and low scores in higher-level questions

of TIMSS-like science test for Grades Five and Nine?

Materials and Methods

Participants and Context

The participants were 937 Omani students, 478 in Grade Five and 459 in Grade Nine. The

participants were from eleven schools located in three important governorates in Oman. The Omani

school system is composed of three stages: Cycle I (Grades 1-4), Cycle II (Grades 5-10) and Cycle III

(Grades 11 and 12). The study proposal went through an ethics checking review by both the funding body

and the Ministry of Education. After their approval was obtained, the schools conducted their own ethics

review before approving the participation of their teachers and students; they also obtained parental

consent required for the students who would be in the study.

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

Instruments

Metacognitive awareness perceptions

The current study used the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) created by Schraw and

Dennison (1994), and a widely used research instrument. The MAI contains four sections, each of which

addresses one type of metacognitive skill: planning, information management strategies, debugging

strategies and evaluation. The original instrument contained 52 items, but this was reduced to 22 because

the original was thought to be too lengthy for young children, and may have negatively affected the data

collected.The shorter version had a balanced number of items in each section. The content validity of

the selected items was validated by a panel of seven science educators and educational psychologists,

who assessed its appropriateness to measure the metacognitive awareness perceptions of young school

students. The items were then translated into Arabic, with the translation veried by two psychologists

uent in both Arabic and English. The modied instrument was then piloted on 120 students, and the

calculated Cronbach Alpha coefcient was 0.95.

TIMSS-like tests

As our aim was to conduct the test in the study in the same way as the actual TIMSS test is

conducted, multiple versions of the test were designed; the actual tests are administered using separate

but matching booklets that are randomly assigned to students. We followed the TIMSS Framework (Mullis

and Martin, 2017) and designed 18 versions of a TIMSS-like science test for Grade Nine and 20 versions of

a Grade Five test. The tests were written by fteen science educators who were trained by an international

expert to design TIMSS-like questions. The tests were then reviewed by six local TIMSS assessment

experts and by an international expert; they were then piloted on 1,163 students. The resulting Cronbach

alpha reliability coefcients ranged between 0.661 and 0.885 with an average of 0.779 for Grade Nine,

and between 0.655 and 0.885 with an average of 0.778 for Grade Five. These values were found to be

acceptable when compared to the reliability values for the actual TIMSS science tests (Martin, Mullis and

Hooper, 2016). More details about the construction of the test, its items, the validation of the matching

versions, and other details can be found in Al-Balushi, Al-Harthy and Almehrizi (2022).

Data collection

The instruments were uploaded into a mobile application designed specially to collect the data

needed for this study; the reader can nd more details about this application elsewhere (Al-Balushi,

Al-Harthy and Almehrizi, 2022). The mobile application, called the Trends in Oman Science Study

(TOSS), was designed by the Sas for Entrepreneurship Center under the Omani Ministry of Transport,

Communications and Information Technology; it was piloted on 120 students in order to ensure that

there were no technical or administrative malfunctions. The study also hired twelve science teachers as

research assistants; their role was to administer the study instruments in their classrooms in each of the

selected schools. The administration of TIMSS-like test lasted for 40 minutes, while the administration of

the metacognitive awareness perceptions instrument lasted for 10 minutes.

Data Analysis

We used means and standard deviations to describe participants’ scores in the four sections of

the metacognitive awareness perceptions instrument: planning, information management strategies,

debugging strategies and evaluation. We also used the Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) to

answer the research questions and to discover whether there were any differences between high- and

low-scoring students in the four sections of the metacognitive awareness perceptions instrument.

Results

Tables 1-4 illustrate the results of the study, and show signicant Wilks’ Lambda values for all

MANOVA analyses conducted on the data. The ndings also indicate that there were signicant differences

in metacognitive awareness perceptions between high- and low-scoring students, showing that, in both

Grades Five and Nine, students with higher overall performances on the TIMSS-like test also had higher

metacognitive awareness perceptions. When data was analysed separately for performance on lower-

level and higher-level test questions, the results were found to be the same.

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

Table 1.

Means and standard deviations of metacognitive awareness perceptions for Grade Five

Table 2.

MANOVA results of between-subjects effects for metacognitive awareness perceptions and TIMSS-

like total performance of Grade Five (df=1, 475)

a: Wilks’ Lambda= 0.96, F= 5.16, P= 0.000

b: Wilks’ Lambda= 0.97, F= 3.44, P= 0.009

c: Wilks’ Lambda= 0.97, F= 3.07, P= 0.016

Table 3.

Means and standard deviations of metacognitive awareness perceptions for Grade Nine

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

Table 4.

MANOVA results of between-subjects effects for metacognitive awareness perceptions and TIMSS-

like total performance of Grade Nine (df=1, 454)

a: Wilks’ Lambda= 0.92, F= 9.73, P= 0.000

b: Wilks’ Lambda= 0.94, F= 7.21, P= 0.000

c: Wilks’ Lambda= 0.93, F= 9.06, P= 0.000

Discussions

The ndings of the current study showed that the metacognitive awareness of the higher-performing

participants in Grades Five and Nine was consistently and signicantly higher than that of the lower-

performing participants. This was the case for the overall test scores, as well as for the scores in lower-

level questions and the scores in higher-level questions. These ndings emphasize the importance of

metacognitive awareness in student test performance on both lower-level and higher-level questions.

These ndings also conrm the existence of a undeniable association between metacognition and

academic performance, which has been emphasized consistently by previous research (Efklides, 2011;

Wiley and Guss, 2007; Hong, Bernacki and Perera, 2020; Jaleel and Premachandran, 2016; Joseph, 2010;

Mahdavi, 2014; Miller and Geraci, 2011; Santelmann, Stevens and Martin, 2018; Sutiyatno and Sukarno,

2019; Tok, Özgan and Döş, 2010). This and other studies have come to a number of conclusions about

the role of metacognitive thinking in test-taking. The ndings of the current study indeed indicate that

answering TIMSS test items is a cognitively demanding process, and that metacognitive thinking skills are

essential for students taking these tests. Looking at the issue from a practical point of view, Zimmerman

and Moylan (2009) have argued that such demanding contexts require test-takers to use their initiative and

to be self-regulated, resourceful and persistent, all of which require the use of metacognitive skills. It has

also been argued by proponents of the social cognitive model of self-regulation that test-takers engage

in a three-phase cyclical mental process. These phases are the forethought phase, the performance

phase and the self-reection phase, and all require metacognitive abilities if they are to be successful.

For instance, during the performance phase, test-takers must use self-observation strategies such as

time management, imagery that enhances the processing of information into the memory system, and

self-instruction; failure to mobilise these metacognitive strategies could result in poor test performance

(Panadero and Alonso-Tapia, 2014). The current study provides added evidence that strong levels of

metacognitive processing are an essential factor for students to perform well in the TIMSS science test;

lack of these metacognitive skills is a key factor in reducing their ability to conduct the mental processes

required to succeed in the test.

Science education literature offers little information about the link between students’ metacognitive

awareness and their performance in examinations, and we are aware of no study that has specically

investigated this association in the context of student performance in international science tests such

as TIMSS. However, research in other areas might help to explain our ndings, and their linking of the

performance of high-achieving students to their metacognitive awareness. A number of previous research

studies suggest that the possession of a high level of metacognitive awareness allows students to reect

on their thinking and monitor its progress; it also helps them to control their thinking processes and

direct them towards achieving the goals for which they strive (Efklides, 2011; Jaleel and Premachandran,

2016; Joseph, 2010; Larkin, 2006; Mahdavi, 2014; Sutiyatno and Sukarno, 2019; Tok, Özgan and Döş,

2010). Thus, since researchers have widely reported a positive association between metacognition and

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

both science achievement (Hong, Bernacki and Perera, 2020; Larkin, 2006; Oyelekan, Jolayemi and

Upahi, 2019) and performance on science examinations (Casselman and Atwood, 2017), it is plausible to

conclude that the high level of metacognitive awareness of the higher-scoring students in the current study

contributed to their strong performance in the TIMSS-like science tests. Students with high metacognition

have been shown to approach test questions by eliminating incorrect options, underlining the clues found

in the question text, re-examining their answers, and using a range of metacognitive strategies to respond

to the specic features of the test items, whether these involve narrative, gures or graphics (Diken,

2020); all of these features frequently characterise TIMSS test items (Mullis and Martin, 2017). Research

also shows that metacognition helps learners better comprehend science texts (Wang and Chen, 2014;

Wang et al., 2014), which would again help TIMSS test-takers, given that a number of the test items

involve reading a short passage before answering related questions. In addition, students with good

metacognitive skills are better able to assess the prior knowledge they retrieve from long-term memory

during a test, and can mediate the construction of meaning in working memory (Wang and Chen, 2014),

skills which gain them better results. Metacognition also increases the ability to conceptualize and think

about a variety of abstract scientic concepts and phenomena, a skill which constitutes a major learning

challenge for many novice learners, (Al-Balushi and Martin-Hansen, 2019). According to Piaget’s theory of

cognition, meta-thinking is a core metacognitive process and is also essential to comprehending abstract

concepts and phenomena (Bates, 2019); students with high metacognitive awareness are therefore in a

better position to process science test questions involving a high level of abstraction.

Conclusions, Recommendations & Limitations

The current study contributes to the literature by exploring the difference in metacognitive

awareness perceptions between students with high and low scores on TIMSS-like science tests; this

subject, and the important association between metacognition and TIMSS science test-taking, had not

been specically studied before. The current study reports that high-achieving students had a signicantly

higher level of metacognitive awareness than was present in their low-achieving counterparts. This very

clear nding indicates that it is crucial for science educators to explore different ways to support student

metacognition. Fortunately, there is already a signicant body of research on the subject. A number of

studies indicate that metacognition can be enhanced through practice, especially during social interaction

with peers (Adey, 1999; Larkin, 2006, 2010; Oliver and Venville, 2015; Shayer and Adey, 2002). There are

numerous examples of instructional methods that have been shown to enhance student metacognition,

including cognitive acceleration through science education (CASE), thinking aloud, self-report checklists,

interaction with peers, whole classroom dialogue, the Know-What-Learned (KWL) model, design-based

science learning and reection reports (Adey, 1999; Durley and Ge, 2019; Efklides, 2011; Wiley and Guss,

2007; Joseph, 2010; Miller and Geraci, 2011; Oliver and Venville, 2015; Tas, Aksoy and Cengiz, 2019;

Whitebread, Grau and Somerville, 2018).

Other studies have addressed the question of how to improve student performance during actual test-

taking; suggestions include the use of metacognitive prompts such as reecting on test questions through

self-monitoring, evaluation and explanation. Other types of prompts may include encouraging students to

connect the current questions to their prior knowledge, to reect on a problem before attempting to solve

it, and to think of the best strategy to solve the problem being faced (Aurah, Cassady and McConnell,

2014). Metacognitive prompts may also be programmed and provided to learners electronically during

tests through computer-based scaffolding (Shubber, Udin and Minghat, 2015; Tang et al., 2016). Another

suggestion for enhancing metacognitive awareness is to continually request students to predict their test

scores and to reect on the accuracy of their predictions: this can be helpful because an individual’s ability

to predict their performance is seen as an important test of metacognitive monitoring (Casselman and

Atwood, 2017; Hawker, Dysleski and Rickey, 2016).

Pre-test training has also been suggested to help students to perform better in tests. One method

is to have students reect – before the test - on their ability to solve questions related to the main topics

on the course. Pre-test training has also been proved to be successful when an online medium is used

to host metacognitive reective prompts; this is done throughout the semester, and students respond to

the prompts before taking any type of test, short quizzes as well as mid and nal exams (Casselman and

Atwood, 2017). Curriculum materials could also be redesigned to scaffold for better metacognition; one

method is the use of refutation text structure, which has been shown to involve and develop metacognition

(Tippett, 2010; Wang and Chen, 2014).

Overall, then, it is evident that metacognitive training needs to be embedded in science curriculum

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

guidelines, instructional methods and learning materials, and we recommend that science teachers, as

well as curriculum and materials designers, be made aware of the importance of including meta-cognitive

training to support students’ academic achievement. However, further research is needed to explore the

impact of metacognitive training on student performance in specic science examinations such as TIMSS.

One limitation of the current study is the fact that it depends on a quantitative method for obtaining

its data, namely a self-report metacognitive awareness perceptions inventory. Richer data could be

provided by supporting this with qualitative data collection methods; these could include think-aloud

protocols, portfolio analysis, and classroom observation, all of which could form part of a follow-up study

of metacognition in science learning.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the generous funding provided by the Research Council of

the Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation in Oman (Project no. RC/EDU/CUTM/15/01),

as well as the nancial and technical support of the Sas for Entrepreneurship Center in designing the

TOSS application. (“Sas” is an Arabic word meaning a solid foundation, and the centre aims to provide a

foundation to foster entrepreneurs and nurture the ICT sector in Oman. It comes under Oman’s Ministry

of Transport, Communications and Information Technology, MTCIT.)

Conict of interests

The authors declare no conict of interest.

References

Adey, P. (1999). The Science of Thinking, and Science for Thinking: A Description of Cognitive Acceleration through Science

Education (CASE). Innodata Monographs 2. UNESCO International Bureau of Education. Retrieved from http://www.

ibe.unesco.org/leadmin/user_upload/archive/Publications/innodata/inno02.pdf

Akben, N. (2020). Effects of the problem-posing approach on students’ problem solving skills and metacognitive awareness

in science education. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 1143-1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9726-7

Al-Balushi, S. M., & Martin-Hansen, L. (2019). The development of students’ justications for their positions regarding two

theoretical models: Electron cloud or sodium chloride crystal—After engaging in different learning activities. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 56(8), 1011-1036. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21535

Al-Balushi, S. M., Al-Harthy, I. S., & Almehrizi, R. S. (2022). Attention Drifting Away While Test-Taking: Mind-Wandering in

Students with Low-and High-Performance Levels in TIMSS-Like Science Tests. International Journal of Science and

Mathematics Education, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10258-6

Al-Harthy, I. S. (2016). Prediction Accuracy: The Role of Feedback in 6th Graders’ Recall Predictions. International Education

Studies, 9(3), 212-216. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n3p212

Al-Harthy, I. S., Was, C. A., & Hassan, A. S. (2015). Poor performers are poor predictors of performance and they know it: Can

they improve their prediction accuracy. Journal of Global Research in Education and Social Science, 4(2), 93-100.

Retrieved from https://www.ikprress.org/index.php/JOGRESS/article/view/2322

Antonio, R. P. (2020). Developing Students’ Reective Thinking Skills in a Metacognitive and Argument-Driven Learning

Environment. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(3), 467-483. https://doi.org/10.46328/

ijres.v6i3.1096

Aurah, C. M., Cassady, J. C., & McConnell, T. J. (2014). Genetics problem solving in high school testing in Kenya: Effects of

metacognitive prompting during testing. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 18(8), 1-26. Retrieved from https://

ejrsme.icrsme.com/article/view/13519

Baker, L. & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognition skills and reading. In P. D. Person, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal

(Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman. Retrieved from https://cir.nii.ac.jp/

crid/1573105975197503872

Balashov, E., Pasichnyk, I., Kalamazh, R., & Zdrobylko, T. (2020). Reexive competence in metacognitive monitoring of

learning activity of HEI students. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education,

8(Special issue), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2020-8-SI-17-28

Bates, B. (2019). Learning Theories Simplied. Sage. Retrieved from https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/learning-theories-

simplied/book261881

Brown, A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R. A., & Campione, J. C. (1983). Learning, remembering and understanding in JH

Flavell & EM Markman (eds.) Handbook of child psychology. Cognitive development, 3. (pp. 77-166). New Youk: Wiley.

Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED217401

Casselman, B. L., & Atwood, C. H. (2017). Improving general chemistry course performance through online homework-

based metacognitive training. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(12), 1811-1821. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.

jchemed.7b00298

Chiu, M. S. (2012). Differential psychological processes underlying the skill-development model and self-enhancement model

across mathematics and science in 28 countries. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(3),

611-642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-011-9309-9

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

Coutinho, S. A. (2007). The relationship between goals, metacognition, and academic success. The Journal of Doctoral

Research in Education, 7(1), 39–47. Retrieved from https://www.educatejournal.org/index.php/educate/article/

view/116/0

Diken, E. H. (2020). Cognitive and metacognitive strategies of 6th-grade students to answer multiple-choice questions on

“human body systems”. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 12(2), 436-456. Retrieved from http://ijci.

wcci-international.org/index.php/IJCI/article/view/435

Durley, H. C. K., & Ge, X. (2019). Social Discourse Inuencing Elementary Teachers’ Cognition and Metacognition for Problem

Solving in Open-Ended Professional Development. New Waves-Educational Research and Development Journal,

22(1), 55-71. Retrieved from https://les.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1229364.pdf

Efklides, A. (2011). Interactions of metacognition with motivation and affect in self-regulated learning: The MASRL model.

Educational psychologist, 46(1), 6-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538645

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American

psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Hawker, M. J., Dysleski, L., & Rickey, D. (2016). Investigating general chemistry students’ metacognitive monitoring of their

exam performance by measuring postdiction accuracies over time. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(5), 832-840.

https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00705

Hong, W., Bernacki, M. L., & Perera, H. N. (2020). A latent prole analysis of undergraduates’ achievement motivations and

metacognitive behaviors, and their relations to achievement in science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(7),

1409-1430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000445

Jaleel, S., & Premachandran, P. (2016). A Study on the Metacognitive Awareness of Secondary School Students. Universal

Journal of Educational Research, 4(1), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040121

Joseph, N. (2010). Metacognition needed: Teaching middle and high school students to develop strategic learning

skills. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 54(2), 99-103. https://doi.

org/10.1080/10459880903217770

Kang, H., & Cogan, L. (2022). The differential role of socioeconomic status in the relationship between curriculum-based

mathematics and mathematics literacy: The link between TIMSS and PISA. International Journal of Science and

Mathematics Education, 20(1), 133-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10133-2

Larkin, S. (2006). Collaborative group work and individual development of metacognition in the early years. Research in

science education, 36(1), 7-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-8147-1

Larkin, S. (2010). Metacognition in young children. London: Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.routledge.com/

Metacognition-in-Young-Children/Larkin/p/book/9780415463584

Lee, C. B., Koh, N. K., Cai, X. L., & Quek, C. L. (2012). Children’s use of meta-cognition in solving everyday problems: Children’s

monetary decisionmaking. Australian Journal of Education, 56(1), 22-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03216907

Liu, S., & Liu, M. (2020). The impact of learner metacognition and goal orientation on problem-solving in a serious game

environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 151-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.021

López-Vargas, O., Ibáñez-Ibáñez, J., & Racines-Prada, O. (2017). Students’ metacognition and cognitive style and their effect

on cognitive load and learning achievement. Journal of educational technology & society, 20(3), 145-157. Retrieved

from https://www.jstor.org/stable/26196126

Mahdavi, M. (2014). An overview: Metacognition in education. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and current research,

2(6), 529-535. Retrieved from http://ijmcr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Paper5529-535.pdf

Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Hooper, M. (Eds.). (2016). Methods and procedures in TIMSS 2015. TIMSS & PIRLS International

Study Center. Retrieved from http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/publications/timss/2015-methods.html

McCabe, J. (2011). Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory & cognition, 39(3), 462-476.

https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0035-2

Meniado, J. C. (2016). Metacognitive Reading Strategies, Motivation, and Reading Comprehension Performance of Saudi EFL

Students. English Language Teaching, 9(3), 117-129. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n3p117

Miller, T. M., & Geraci, L. (2011). Training metacognition in the classroom: The inuence of incentives and feedback on exam

predictions. Metacognition and Learning, 6(3), 303-314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9083-7

Moir, T., Boyle, J., & Woolfson, L. M. (2020). Developing higher-order reading skills in mainstream primary schools: A

metacognitive and self-regulatory approach. British Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 399-420. https://doi.

org/10.1002/berj.3584

Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (Eds.). (2017). TIMSS 2019 assessment framework. International Association for the Evaluation

of Educational Achievement. Retrieved from https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/frameworks

Mullis, I., Martin, M., Foy, D., Kelly, D. & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 International Results in Mathematics and Science.

The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Retrieved from https://timssandpirls.

bc.edu/timss2019

Oliver, M. & Venville, G. (2015). Cognitive acceleration through science education: the CASE for thinking through science. In

R. Wegerif, L. Li and J. Kaufman, the Routledge International Handbook of Research on Teaching Thinking. Routledge.

Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315797021-38/cognitive-acceleration-

science-education-mary-oliver-grady-venville

Oyelekan, O. S., Jolayemi, S. S., & Upahi, J. E. (2019). Relationships among senior school students’ self-efcacy, metacognition

and their achievement in Chemistry. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 14(2), 208-221. https://doi.org/10.18844/

cjes.v14i2.2564

Panadero, E., & Alonso Tapia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate?: review of Zimmerman`s cyclical model of self-

regulated learning. Anales de psicologia, 30(2), 450-462. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.2.167221

Rahman, S., & Md Hassan, N. (2017). Problem solving skills, metacognitive awareness, and mathematics achievement: A

mediation model. The New Educational Review, 49, 201-212. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2017.49.3.16

Ruthven, K. (2011). Using international study series and meta-analytic research syntheses to scope pedagogical development

aimed at improving student attitude and achievement in school mathematics and science. International Journal of

Science and Mathematics Education, 9(2), 419-458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9243-2

www.ijcrsee.com

Al-Balushi, M. S. et al. (2022). Metacognitive awareness perceptions of students with high and low scores on TIMSS-Like

science tests, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(3), 73-82.

Saenz, G. D., Geraci, L., & Tirso, R. (2019). Improving metacognition: A comparison of interventions. Applied Cognitive

Psychology, 33(5), 918-929. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3556

Santelmann, L. M., Stevens, D. D., & Martin, S. B. (2018). Fostering master’s students’ metacognition and self-regulation

practices for research writing. College Teaching, 66(3), 111-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2018.1446898

Sari Faradiba, S., Sa’dijah, C., Parta, N., & Rahardjo, S. (2019). Looking without seeing: the role of metacognitive blindness

of student with high math anxiety. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education,

7(2), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.5937/IJCRSEE1902053F

Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary educational psychology, 19(4),

460-475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033

Shayer, M., & Adey, P. (2002). Learning intelligence: Cognitive acceleration across the curriculum from 5 to 15 years. Open

University Press. Retrieved from https://www.mheducation.co.uk/learning-intelligence-9780335211364-emea

Shubber, A. H., Udin, A. B., & Minghat, A. B. (2015). Vickers test simulation to improve metacognitive skills. Procedia-Social

and Behavioral Sciences, 204, 45-53. https://doi-org.uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.108

Siagan, M. V., Saragih, S., & Sinaga, B. (2019). Development of Learning Materials Oriented on Problem-Based Learning

Model to Improve Students’ Mathematical Problem Solving Ability and Metacognition Ability. International electronic

journal of mathematics education, 14(2), 331-340. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5717

Sutiyatno, S., & Sukarno. (2019). A Survey study: The correlation between metacognitive strategies and reading achievement.

Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 9(4), 438-444. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0904.11

Tang, K. Y., Wang, C. Y., Chang, H. Y., Chen, S., Lo, H. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). The intellectual structure of metacognitive

scaffolding in science education: A co-citation network analysis. International Journal of Science and Mathematics

Education, 14(2), 249-262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9696-4

Tas, Y., Aksoy, G., & Cengiz, E. (2019). Effectiveness of design-based science on students’ learning in electrical energy and

metacognitive self-regulation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(6), 1109-1128. https://

doi-org.uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9923-x

Tighezza, M. H. (2014). Modeling relationships among learning, attitude, self-perception, and science achievement for grade 8

Saudi students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(4), 721-740. https://doi.org/10.1007/

s10763-013-9426-8

Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International journal of science

and mathematics education, 8(6), 951-970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9203-x

Tok, H., Özgan, H., & Döş, B. (2010). Assessing Metacognitive Awareness And Learning Strategies As Positive Predictors

For Success In A Distance Learning Class/Uzaktan Eğitim Sınıfında Başarının Pozitif Yordayıcısı Olarak Bilişötesi

Farkındalık Stratejisi Ve Öğrenme Stratejilerinin Değerlend. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü

Dergisi, 7(14), 123-134. Retrieved from http://www.mku.edu.tr/les/25_dosya_1334516480.pdf

Wang, C. L., & Liou, P. Y. (2018). Patterns of motivational beliefs in the science learning of total, high-, and low-achieving

students: Evidence of Taiwanese TIMSS 2011 data. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,

16(4), 603-618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9797-3

Wang, J. R., & Chen, S. F. (2014). Exploring mediating effect of metacognitive awareness on comprehension of science texts

through structural equation modeling analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(2), 175-191. https://doi.

org/10.1002/tea.21131

Wang, J. R., Chen, S. F., Fang, I., & Chou, C. T. (2014). Comparison of Taiwanese and Canadian students’ metacognitive

awareness of science reading, text, and strategies. International Journal of Science Education, 36(4), 693-713. https://

doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.826841

Was, C. A., & Al-Harthy, I. (2015). Developmental differences in overcondence: When do children understand that attempting

to recall predicts memory performance?. The Researcher, 27(1), 1-5. Retrieved from https://www.nrmera.org/wp-

content/uploads/2016/02/Was.and_.Al_.Harthy.2015.Vol_.27.Issue_.1.pdf

Whitebread, D., Grau, V., & Somerville, M. P. (2018). Commentary: Relationships Between Classroom Dialogue and Support

for Metacognitive, Self-Regulatory Development in Educational Contexts. New Directions for Child and Adolescent

Development, 2018(162), 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20257

Wiley, B., & Güss, C. D. (2007). Metacognition of problem-solving strategies in Brazil, India, and the United States. Journal of

cognition and Culture, 7(1-2), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853707X171793

Zhao, B. (2014). Construction of Independent Learning Network Platform for Engineering Students based on Metacognition.

Journal of Educational & Psychological Sciences, 15(03), 559-575. http://dx.doi.org/10.12785/JEPS/150319

Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In Handbook of

metacognition in education (pp. 299-315). Routledge. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-06038-016