Cited by 39Artificial Intelligence in EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningReflective Practices in Education

Metacognition meets AI : Empowering reflective writing with large language models

Open access
Neshaei, Seyed Parsa, Mejia‐Domenzain, Paola, Davis, Richard Lee, Käser, Tanja·2025·British Journal of Educational Technology

Abstract

Reflective writing is known as a useful method in learning sciences to improve the metacognitive skills of students. However, students struggle to structure their reflections properly, limiting the possible learning gains. Previous works in educational technologies literature have explored the paradigms of learning from worked and modelling examples, but (a) their application to the domain of reflective writing is rare, (b) such methods might not scale properly to large‐scale classrooms, and (c) they do not necessarily take the learning needs of each student into account. In this work, we suggest two approaches of integrating AI‐enabled support in digital systems designed around learning from worked and modelling examples paradigms, to provide personalized learning and feedback to students using large language models (LLMs). We evaluate Reflectium, our reflective writing assistant, show benefits of integrating AI support into the learning from examples modalities and compare the perception of the users and their interaction behaviour when using each version of our tool. Our work sheds light on the applicability of generative LLMs to different types of providing support using the learning from examples paradigm, in the domain of reflective writing. Practitioner notes: What is already known about this topic Reflective writing fosters metacognitive skills and improves learning gains and personal growth. The learning from worked and modelling examples paradigms is effective for skill acquisition and applying the acquired knowledge. Existing reflective writing assistants usually lack dynamic, AI‐driven feedback or interactivity, limiting personalization and adaptability to each user's own needs in the learning process. What this paper adds It introduces Reflectium, an AI‐enabled reflective writing assistant, integrating intelligent and interactive writing support for both the learning from worked and modelling examples paradigms. It demonstrates the use of a fine‐tuned large language model (LLM) for providing feedback in the learning from worked examples version, and an LLM‐powered conversational agent simulating instructor interactions for the learning from modelling examples version. It reports findings from a user study comparing the positive impact of artificial intelligence (AI) support on learners' performance, interaction behaviour and learning experience. Implications for practice and/or policy Digital tutoring systems for teaching reflective writing using the learning from worked examples paradigm should incorporate adaptive AI feedback to enhance learning gains. Conversational agents simulating peers/instructors and powered by LLMs can provide scalable, interactive support for learning from modelling examples, notably in large‐scale educational settings. Reflective writing tools should be evaluated for their impact on different aspects of the learning process, such as task performance, interaction behaviour and user experience, to guide future improvements. Educators and policymakers should consider the integration of AI‐driven reflective writing tools into teaching curricula to enhance reflective practices and metacognitive skill development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/bjet.13601

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Effective AI use helps students develop critical and metacognitive skills when implemented through guided, reflective practices rather than passive consumption.

    “Studies have shown that effective AI use helps students develop critical and metacognitive skills when implemented through guided, reflective practices rather than passive consumption (Essel et al., 2024; Neshaei et al., 2025).”
  • genAI provides novel affordances previously limited by technological capabilities, such as adaptive and interactive feedback.

    “genAI provides novel affordances previously limited by technological capabilities, such as adaptive and interactive feedback (Bauer, Richters, et al., 2025;Neshaei et al., 2025).”

    From How do students regulate their learning with a genAI chatbot? (2026) · cites this paper as Neshaei et al., 2025

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Neshaei, S. P., Mejia‐Domenzain, P., Davis, R. L., & Käser, T.
Affiliations
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
  • KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
Corresponding author
Neshaei, Seyed Parsa
Venue
British Journal of Educational Technology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-05-12
Volume
56
Issue
5
Pages
1864-1896
ISSN
  • 0007-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8535
OpenAlex
W4410305657
Cited by
39
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 7
FWCI
40.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Educational Technology (publishedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Singapore Eye Research Institute
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Reflective Practices in Education
Keywords
reflective writing, metacognition, large language models, AI-generated feedback, chatbots, personalized learning, user experience, generative AI in education, fine-tuned language models

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review