CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 49Innovative Teaching and Learning MethodsMathematics Education and PedagogyMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques

Learning Mathematics in Metacognitively Oriented ICT-Based Learning Environments: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Open access
Verschaffel, Lieven, Depaepe, Fien, Mevarech, Zemira·2019·Education Research International
DOI 10.1155/2019/3402035
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article encompasses a systematic review of the research on ICT-based learning environments for metacognitively oriented K-12 mathematics education. This review begins with a brief overview of the research on metacognition and mathematics education and on ICT and mathematics education. Based on a systematic screening of the databases Web of Science and ERIC wherein three elements—ICT-based learning environments, metacognitive pedagogies, and mathematics—are combined, 22 articles/studies were retrieved, situated at various educational levels (kindergarten, elementary school, and secondary school). This review revealed a variety of studies, particularly intervention studies, situated in elementary and secondary schools. Most studies involved drill-and-practice software, intelligent tutoring systems, serious games, multimedia environments, and computer-supported collaborative learning environments, with metacognitive pedagogies either integrated into the ICT software itself or provided externally by the teacher, mainly for arithmetic or algebraic word problem-solving but also related to other mathematical topics. All studies reported positive effects on mathematical and/or metacognitive learning outcomes. This review ends with a discussion of issues for further theoretical reflection and empirical research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1155/2019/3402035

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • ICT use yields positive learning gains in metacognitive learning outcomes.

    “metacognitive learning outcomes (Verschaffel et al., 2019)”

    From Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review (2023) · cites this paper as Verschaffel et al., 2019

    Section 3.2 reports positive metacognitive learning effects in mathematics environments combining ICT with metacognitive guidance. It also cautions that several study designs could not establish the added value of that combination over ICT alone, so the review does not establish that ICT use by itself yields those gains. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking, How People Learn. Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, National Aca- demia Press, Washington, DC, USA, 2000.
  2. J. A. C. Hattie, Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta- Analyses Relating to Achievement, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2008.
  3. O. López-Vargas, J. Ibáñez-Ibáñez, and O. Racines-Prada, "Students' metacognition and cognitive style and their effect on cognitive load and learning achievement," Educational Technology & Society, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 145-157, 2017.
  4. A. H. Schoenfeld, "Learning to think mathematically. Problem solving, metacognition and sense-making in mathematics," in Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (A Project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics), D. A. Grouws, Ed., pp. 334-370, MacMillan, New York, NY, USA, 1992.
  5. D. H. Schunk and J. A. Greene, Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2018.
  6. Y.-h. Tsai, C.-h. Lin, J.-c. Hong, and K.-h. Tai, " e effects of metacognition on online learning interest and continuance to learn with MOOCs," Computers & Education, vol. 121, pp. 18-29, 2018.
  7. J. H. Flavell, P. H. Miller, and S. A. Miller, Cognitive Development, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 4th edition, 2002.
  8. A. Brown, "Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms," in Metacognition, Motivation and Understanding, F. Weinert and R. Kluwe, Eds., pp. 65-116, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1987.
  9. G. Schraw and R. S. Dennison, "Assessing metacognitive awareness," Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 460-475, 1994.
  10. E. De Corte, B. Greer, and L. Verschaffel, "Learning and teaching mathematics," in Handbook of Educational Psy- chology, D. Berliner and R. Calfee, Eds., pp. 491-549, Macmillan, New York, NY, USA, 1996.
  11. E. Baeten, A. Desoete, and M. Praet, " e relevance and ef- ficacy of metacognition for instructional design in the domain of mathematics," ZDM International Journal on Mathematics Education, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 613-623, 2017.
  12. Z. Mevarech, L. Verschaffel, and E. De Corte, "Metacognitive pedagogies in mathematics classrooms: from kindergarten to college and beyond," in Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance, D. H. Schunk and J. A. Greene, Eds., pp. 109-123, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 2018.
  13. M. V. J. Veenman, B. H. A. M. Van Hout-Wolters, and P. Afflerbach, "Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations," Metacognition and Learning, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3-14, 2006.
  14. D. Whitebread and P. Coltman, "Aspects of pedagogy sup- porting metacognition and self-regulation in mathematical learning of young children: evidence from an observational study," Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 163-178, 2010.
  15. W. Schneider and C. Artelt, "Metacognition and mathematics education," Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 149-161, 2010.
  16. G. Stillman and Z. Mevarech, "Metacognition research in mathematics education: from hot topic to mature field," Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 145-148, 2010.
  17. M. V. J. Veenman and M. A. Spaans, "Relation between in- tellectual and metacognitive skills: age and task differences," Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 159- 176, 2005.
  18. A. H. Schoenfeld, Mathematics Problem Solving, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1985.
  19. M. Cardelle-Elawar, "Effects of metacognitive instruction on low achievers in mathematics problems," Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 81-95, 1995.
  20. A. Desoete, H. Roeyers, and A. De Clercq, "Can offline metacognition enhance mathematical problem solving?," Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 188-200, 2003.
  21. D. Lucangeli, C. Cornoldi, and M. Tellarinin, "Metacognition and learning disabilities in mathematics," in Advances in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities, T. E. Scruggs and M. A. Mastropieri, Eds., pp. 219-285, JAI Press Inc, Greenwich, UK, 1988.
  22. L. Mason and L. Scrivani, "Enhancing students' mathematical beliefs: an intervention study," Learning and Instruction, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 153-176, 2004.
  23. Z. Mevarech and S. Fridkin, " e effects of IMPROVE on mathematical knowledge, mathematical reasoning and meta- cognition," Metacognition and Learning, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 85-97, 2006.
  24. Z. R. Mevarech and B. Kramarski, "Improve: a multidi- mensional method for teaching mathematics in heteroge- neous classrooms," American Educational Research Journal, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 365-394, 1997.
  25. A. Panouara, A. Demetriou, and A. Gagatsis, "Mathe- matical modeling, self-representations and self-regula- tion," in Proceedings of the Sixth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME 6), V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne, and F. Arzarello, Eds., pp. 94-103, Institute National de Recherche Pédagogique, Lyon, France, January 2010.
  26. L. Verschaffel, E. De Corte, S. Lasure, G. Van Vaerenbergh, H. Bogaerts, and E. Ratinckx, "Learning to solve mathematical application problems: a design experiment with fifth graders," Mathematical inking and Learning, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 195- 229, 1999.
  27. S. Abramovich and M. L. Connell, "Using technology in el- ementary mathematics teacher education: a sociocultural perspective," ISRN Education, vol. 2014, Article ID 345146, 9 pages, 2014.
  28. R. Azevedo, M. Taub, and N. V. Mudrick, "Understanding and reasoning about real-time cognitive, affective, and met- acognitive processes to foster self-regulation with advanced learning technologies," in Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance, D. H. Schunk and J. A. Greene, Eds., pp. 254-270, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2018.
  29. R. M. Zbiek, M. K. Heid, G. Blume, and T. P. Dick, "Research on technology in mathematics education: the perspective of constructs," in Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, F. K. Lester, Ed., pp. 1159-1207, Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT, USA, 2007.
  30. R. E. Mayer, "Learning with technology," in e Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice, H. Dumont, D. Istance, and F. Benavides, Eds., pp. 179-195, OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 2010.
  31. D. Moos, "Emerging classroom technology: using self- regulation principles as a guide for effective implementa- tion," in Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance, D. H. Schunk and J. A. Greene, Eds., pp. 243-253, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2018.
  32. J. L. Nietfeld, " e role of self-regulated learning in digital games," in Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance, D. H. Schunk and J. A. Greene, Eds., pp. 271- 284, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2018.
  33. P. Reimann and M. Bannert, "Self-regulation of learning and performance in computer-supported collaborative learning environments," in Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance, D. H. Schunk and J. A. Greene, Eds., pp. 285-303, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2018.
  34. A. Krouska, C. Troussas, and M. Virvou, "Computerized adaptive assessment using accumulative learning activities based on revised Bloom's taxonomy," in Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Knowledge-Based Software Engineering, pp. 252-258, Springer Nature, Corfu, Greece, August 2018.
  35. D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, D. G. Altman, and e PRISMA Group, "Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement," Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 151, no. 4, pp. 264-269, 2009.
  36. A. Elliott and N. Hall, " e impact of self-regulatory teaching strategies on "at-risk" preschoolers' mathematical learning in a computer-mediated environment," Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, vol. 8, no. 2-3, pp. 187-198, 1997.
  37. A. Shamir and I. Lifshitz, "E-Books for supporting the emergent literacy and emergent math of children at risk for learning disabilities: can metacognitive guidance make a difference?," European Journal of Special Needs Education, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 33-48, 2013.
  38. C.-H. Chen and C.-H. Chiu, "Collaboration scripts for en- hancing metacognitive self-regulation and mathematics lit- eracy," International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 263-280, 2016.
  39. W. D. de Kock and E. G. Harskamp, "Can teachers in primary education implement a metacognitive computer programme for word problem solving in their mathematics classes?," Educational Research and Evaluation, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 231-250, 2014.
  40. M. Dresel and M. Haugwitz, "A computer-based approach to fostering motivation and self-regulated learning," e Journal of Experimental Education, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 3-20, 2008.
  41. A. E. Jacobse and E. G. Harskamp, "Student-controlled metacognitive training for solving word problems in primary school mathematics," Educational Research and Evaluation, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 447-463, 2009.
  42. G. Lazakidou and S. Retalis, "Using computer supported collaborative learning strategies for helping students acquire self-regulated problem-solving skills in mathematics," Com- puters & Education, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 3-13, 2010.
  43. S. Y. Okita, "Learning from the folly of others: learning to self- correct by monitoring the reasoning of virtual characters in a computer-supported mathematics learning environment," Computers & Education, vol. 71, pp. 257-278, 2014.
  44. S. K. Teong, " e effect of metacognitive training on math- ematical word-problem solving," Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 46-55, 2003.
  45. E. Kapa, "A metacognitive support during the process of problem solving in a computerized environment," Educa- tional Studies in Mathematics, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 317-336, 2001.
  46. E. Kapa, "Transfer from structured to open-ended problem solving in a computerized metacognitive environment," Learning and Instruction, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 688-707, 2007.
  47. B. Kramarski and V. Dudai, "Group-metacognitive support for online inquiry in mathematics with differential self- questioning," Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 377-404, 2009.
  48. B. Kramarski and S. Friedman, "Solicited versus unsolicited metacognitive prompts for fostering mathematical problem solving using multimedia," Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 285-314, 2014.
  49. B. Kramarski and M. Gutman, "How can self-regulated learning be supported in mathematical E-learning environ- ments?," Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 24-33, 2006.
  50. B. Kramarski and C. Hirsch, "Using computer algebra systems in mathematical classrooms," Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 35-45, 2003.
  51. B. Kramarski and N. Mizrachi, "Online interactions in a mathematical classroom," Educational Media International, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 43-50, 2006.
  52. B. Kramarski and N. Mizrachi, "Online discussion and self- regulated learning: effects of instructional methods on mathematical literacy," e Journal of Educational Research, vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 218-231, 2006.
  53. K. Maras, T. Gamble, and M. Brosnan, "Supporting meta- cognitive monitoring in mathematics learning for young people with autism spectrum disorder: a classroom-based study," Autism, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 60-70, 2019.
  54. I. Roll, V. Aleven, B. M. McLaren, and K. R. Koedinger, "Designing for metacognition-applying cognitive tutor principles to the tutoring of help seeking," Metacognition and Learning, vol. 2, no. 2-3, pp. 125-140, 2007.
  55. V. Aleven, I. Roll, E. J. Ryu, and K. R. Koedinger, "An ar- chitecture to combine metacognitive and cognitive tutoring: pilot testing the Help Tutor," in Proceedings of the 12th In- ternational Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Educa- tion, pp. 17-24, IOS, Amsterdam, Netherlands, July 2005.
  56. I. Roll, V. Aleven, B. M. McLaren, E. Ryu, R. S. Baker, and K. R. Koedinger, " e Help Tutor: does metacognitive feedback improve students' help-seeking actions, skills, and learning?," in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference in Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 360-369, Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2006.
  57. I. Roll, V. Aleven, B. M. McLaren, and K. R. Koedinger, "Can help seeking be tutored? Searching for the secret sauce of metacognitive tutoring," in Proceedings of the 12th In- ternational Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Educa- tion, pp. 203-210, IOS, Amsterdam, Netherlands, March 2007.
  58. I. Roll, V. Aleven, B. M. McLaren, and K. R. Koedinger, "Improving students' help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system," Learning and Instruction, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 267-280, 2011.
  59. R. Schwonke, A. Ertelt, C. Otieno, A. Renkl, V. Aleven, and R. J. C. M. Salden, "Metacognitive support promotes an ef- fective use of instructional resources in intelligent tutoring," Learning and Instruction, vol. 23, pp. 136-150, 2013.
  60. B. Kramarski and T. Michalsky, "Preparing preservice teachers for self-regulated learning in the context of tech- nological pedagogical content knowledge," Learning and Instruction, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 434-447, 2010.
  61. H. Kaufmann and D. Schmalstieg, "Mathematics and ge- ometry education with collaborative augmented reality," in Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH 2002, Conference Ab- stracts and Applications, pp. 37-41, ACM, New York, NY, USA, July 2002.
  62. J. Martín-Gutiérrez, C. E. Mora, B. Añorbe-Díaz, and A. González-Marrero, "Virtual technologies trends in edu- cation," EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 469-486, 2017.
  63. L. Verschaffel, F. Depaepe, and W. Van Dooren, "Word problems in mathematics education," in Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education, S. Lerman, Ed., pp. 641-645, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2014.
  64. N. Sonwalkar, "Adaptive individualization: the next genera- tion of online education," in Proceedings of the EdMedia + Innovate Learning, pp. 3056-3063, Association for the Ad- vancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Vancouver, Canada, June 2007.
  65. M.-Z. Poh, N. C. Swenson, and R. W. Picard, "A wearable sensor for unobtrusive, long-term assessment of electroder- mal activity," IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 1243-1252, 2010.
  66. S. Batchelor, J. Torbeyns, and L. Verschaffel, "Affect and mathematics in young children: an introduction," Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 201-209, 2019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verschaffel, L., Depaepe, F., & Mevarech, Z.
Affiliations
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • David Yellin College of Education (IL)
Corresponding author
Verschaffel, Lieven
ORCID
Venue
Education Research International
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-09-16
Volume
2019
Pages
1-19
ISSN
  • 2090-4002 (ISSN-L)
  • 2090-4010
DOI
10.1155/2019/3402035
OpenAlex
W2973894834
Cited by
49
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Education Research International (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Keywords
metacognition, mathematics education, K-12 education, drill and practice software, intelligent tutoring systems, serious games, multimedia learning environment, computer-supported collaborative learning, word problem solving, arithmetic, algebra, learning outcomes

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