Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Elham Raeisi
- . Kamal Solati 1
- . Mathias Hossain Aazami 2
- . Nastaran Shamsipour 3
- . Zohreh Sadeghian 3
- . Soleiman Ahmady 4
1 Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences
2 Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Kashani and Hajar University Hospitals, School of Medicine, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences
3 Department of Medical Physics and Radiology, Student Research Committee, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Shahrekord
4 Department of Medical Education, School of Management and Medical Education, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metacognition and academic self‑efficacy are two emerging resources in the process
of learning. Basic levels of metacognition and academic self‑efficacy may differ and be influenced by
demographic and academic factors. This study investigated impacts of demographic and academic
factors on metacognition, metacognitive skills, and academic self‑efficacy in health sciences students.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross‑sectional study was conducted among 404 participating
students attending various fields of study in health sciences at Shahrekord University of Medical
Sciences. Demographic and academic data were collected. Global metacognition, metacognitive
skills, and academic self‑efficacy scores were assessed using published or online questionnaires.
Means were compared using Student’s t‑test, whereas intra‑ and intergroups’ scores were compared
using one‑way ANOVA test.
RESULTS: Global metacognition and academic self‑efficacy were not impacted by demographic
students’ status. The gender and age impacted both knowledge and control of process‑ planning (favoring
male gender), as well knowledge and control‑of‑self (disfavoring 20–30 age class) of metacognitive
skills, (P < 0.05). Academic status did not influence academic self‑efficacy. The school type influenced
the metacognitive skill component to knowledge and control of process‑regulation (disfavoring nursing
school) (P < 0.05). The academic discipline impacted the global metacognition (P < 0.05) and its
knowledge and control of self‑component (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Demographic and academic status does impact metacognitive skills and global
metacognition scores. Given the heterogeneous level to innate metacognitive skills, this study sheds
lights on usefulness to screen learners’ subgroups that require supplementary educational instructions
to uniformly optimize metacognitive skills.
Keywords
to learn from research on metacognition? Emot Rev 2016;8:187‑93.
2. QuestienneL, Van Opstal F, van Dijck JP, GeversW. Metacognition
and cognitive control: Behavioural adaptation requires conflict
experience. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove) 2018;71:411‑23.
3. Ku K, Ho I. Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking.
Metacogn Learn 2010;5:251‑67.
4. Dent AL, Hoyle RH. A framework for evaluating and enhancing
alignment in self‑regulated learning research. Metacogn Learn
2015;10:165‑79.
5. Zhao N, Wardeska JG, McGuire SY, Cook E. Metacognition: An
effective tool to promote success in college science learning. J Coll
Sci Teach 2014;43:48‑54.
6. Young A, Fry DJ. Metacognitive awareness and academic
achievement in college students. J Scholar Teach Learn 2012;8:1‑10.
7. Coertjens L, Donche V, De Maeyer S, Vanthournout G,
Van Petegem P. Modeling change in learning strategies
throughout higher education: A multi‑indicator latent growth
perspective. PLoS One 2013;8:e67854.
8. Raeisi E, Aazami MH, Solati K, Mohamadi O, Ahmady S.
A modified student personalized learning approach to prompt
academic acquisition in health sciences. J Educ Health Promot
2019;8:156.
9. Kallay E. Learning strategies and metacognitive awareness as
predictors of academic achievement in a sample of Romanian
second‑year students. Cogn Brain Behav 2012;16:369‑85.
10. Ndidiamaka RU. Metacognition and achievement goals as
correlates of academic success. C J Educ Res 2010;3:1‑6.
11. Saeedzadeh M, Raeisoon MR, Mohammadi Y. The Relationship
between cognitive and metacognitive strategies and academic
achievement of students of Birjand University of Medical Sciences.
Future Med Educ J 2018;8:27‑30.
12. Hekmati-Nejad E, Safi-Khani S. Studying the interaction of gender
and self‑efficacy [high and low] on the academic achievement of
students in third grade. Bull Env Pharmacol Life Sci 2014;3:67‑72.
13. Tiyuri A, Saberi B, Miri M, Shahrestanaki E, Bayat BB,
Salehiniya H. Research self‑efficacy and its relationship with
academic performance in postgraduate students of Tehran
University of Medical Sciences in 2016. J Educ Health Promot
2018;7:11.
14. Mirderikvand F. The relationship between academic self‑efficacy
with level of education, age and sex in Lorestan University
students. J Chem Pharm Res 2016;8:355‑58.
15. Vahabi B, Vahabi A, Sayyad S, Sayyad M, Roshani D, Hajisahne S.
The status of academic self‑efficacy in the students of Kurdistan
University of Medical Sciences and Islamic Azad University,
Sanandaj Branch, 2015‑2016. Sci J Nurs Midwifery Paramed Fac
2017;3:43‑52.
16. Karami A. Developed a measure to determine the relationship
between the learning strategies and study strategies and academic
achievement. Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University; 2001.
17. Jamali M, Noroozi A, Tahmasebi R. Factors affecting academic
self‑efficacy and its association with academic achievment among
students of Bushehr University Medical Sciences 2012‑2013. Iran J Med Edu 2013;13:629‑41.
18. Stanton JD, Neider XN, Gallegos IJ, Clark NC. Differences in
metacognitive regulation in introductory biology students: When
prompts are not enough. CBE Life Sci Educ 2015;14. pii: ar15.
19. Aldosari MA, Aljabaa AH, Al‑Sehaibany FS, Albarakati SF.
Learning style preferences of dental students at a single
institution in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, evaluated using the VARK
questionnaire. Adv Med Educ Pract 2018;9:179‑86.
20. Tian Y, Fang Y, Li J. The effect of metacognitive knowledge
on mathematics performance in self‑regulated learning
framework‑multiple mediation of self‑efficacy and motivation.
Front Psychol 2018;9:2518.
21. Steuber TD, Janzen KM, Walton AM, Nisly SA. Assessment of
learner metacognition in a professional pharmacy elective course.
Am J Pharm Educ 2017;81:6034.
22. Oguz A, Ataseven N. The relationship between metacognitive
skills and motivation of university students. Educ Process Int J
2016;5:54‑64.
23. Kaur K. Influence of demographic factors on metacognition
and its relationship with critical thinking of higher secondary
students: Foundation for learning. Int J Res Appl Sci Eng Technol
2017;5:358‑63.
24. Siswati BH, Corebima AD. The effect of education level and
gender on students’ metacognitive skills in Malang, Indonesia.
Adv Soc Sci Res J 2017;4:163‑8.
25. Husain UK. Relationship between Self‑Efficacy and Academic
Motivation. International Conference on Economics, Education
and Humanities; 2014. p. 35‑9.
26. Eze TI, Ezenwafor JI, Obi MN. Effects of age and gender on
academic achievement of vocational and technical education(VTE)
students of a Nigerian University. J Emerg Trends Educ Res Policy
Stud 2015;6:96‑101.
27. Amuda BG, Bulus AK, Joseph HP. Marital status and age as
predictors of academic performance of students of colleges
of education in the North‑Eastern Nigeria. Am J Educ Res
2016;4:896‑902.
28. Umar AA, Aliyu HI. Influence of marriage on the academic
performance of female students in tertiary institutions in Sokoto
metropolis. Int J Innov Educ Res 2018;6:42‑8.
29. Robert A, Wooster MA, Chen L. Marital status and academic
performance in college. Coll Stud J 2009;13:106‑11.
30. Kumar R, Lal R. The role of self‑efficacy and gender
difference among the adolescents. J Indian Acad Appl Psychol
2006;32:249‑54.
31. Tambawal MU, Umar AA. Relationship between parental
influence and career choice of students in selected secondary
schools in Sokoto metropolis. Sokoto Int J Couns Psychol
2014;2:25‑37.
)