Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation
Developing an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons in mathematics within sustainable and digital learning contexts: Scoping review
Harlen B. Brioso 1, Ryan V. Dio 2 *
More Detail
1 Master Teacher I, Tabaco National High School, Department of Education – Tabaco City Division, Philippines
2 Department of Mathematics Education, Sorsogon State University – Graduate School, Philippines
* Corresponding Author
Open Access Full Text (PDF)
ARTICLE INFO

Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation, 2027 - Volume 2 Issue 2, Article No: e44787
https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202644787

Article Type: Review Article

Published Online: 08 Sep 2026

Views: 34 | Downloads: 27

ABSTRACT
This study examined recent trends in metacognitive research in mathematics education and developed an evaluation instrument for evaluating metacognitive-based lessons within digitally mediated and sustainable learning environments. Grounded in the need to strengthen the integration of metacognitive strategies in contemporary classroom instruction, the study addressed gaps in both research synthesis and instructional assessment. A scoping review design guided by PRISMA-ScR protocols was employed to systematically identify, screen, and analyze relevant literature published between 2020 and 2025. Academic databases including ERIC, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Education Source were utilized. From an initial 147 records, 20 studies were selected after duplicate removal and eligibility screening. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics to determine the frequency and distribution of study types (foundational, empirical, and experimental), and thematic analysis to identify instructional practices aligned with the metacognitive processes of planning, monitoring, evaluating, and reflection. The results revealed that empirical studies were most prevalent, followed by experimental and foundational studies, indicating a strong emphasis on classroom-based and practice-oriented applications of metacognitive strategies. Frequently identified approaches included think-aloud protocols, self-regulated learning, cooperative learning, and KWL strategies. Instructional practices consistently embedded metacognitive components through structured lesson objectives, guided digital and collaborative activities, and reflective tasks, reinforcing the roles of teachers as facilitators and learners as active, self-regulated participants in technology-enhanced environments. The findings highlight the need for an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons that support sustainable and equitable mathematics instruction in digitally transforming educational contexts, contributing to evidence-based pedagogy, curriculum innovation, and the advancement of quality education in line with global goals for sustainable development.
KEYWORDS
evaluation instrument mathematics education metacognitive strategies scoping review sustainable digital learning environments
In-text citation: (Brioso & Dio, 2027)
Reference: Brioso, H. B., & Dio, R. V. (2027). Developing an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons in mathematics within sustainable and digital learning contexts: Scoping review. Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation, 2(2), e44787. https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202644787
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Brioso HB, Dio RV. Developing an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons in mathematics within sustainable and digital learning contexts: Scoping review. Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation. 2027;2(2), e44787. https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202644787
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Brioso HB, Dio RV. Developing an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons in mathematics within sustainable and digital learning contexts: Scoping review. Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation. 2027;2(2):e44787. https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202644787
In-text citation: (Brioso and Dio, 2027)
Reference: Brioso, Harlen B., and Ryan V. Dio. "Developing an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons in mathematics within sustainable and digital learning contexts: Scoping review". Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation 2027 2 no. 2 (2027): e44787. https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202644787
In-text citation: (Brioso and Dio, 2027)
Reference: Brioso, H. B., and Dio, R. V. (2027). Developing an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons in mathematics within sustainable and digital learning contexts: Scoping review. Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation, 2(2), e44787. https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202644787
In-text citation: (Brioso and Dio, 2027)
Reference: Brioso, Harlen B. et al. "Developing an evaluation instrument for metacognitive-based lessons in mathematics within sustainable and digital learning contexts: Scoping review". Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation, vol. 2, no. 2, 2027, e44787. https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202644787
REFERENCES
  • Aviory, K., Retnawati, H., & Sudiyatno, S. (2025). Factors affecting mathematics achievement: Online learning, self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 9(3), 276–290. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202534085
  • Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.523
  • Baudin, J. S. P. (2025). Assessing the psychometric properties of AI-generated multiple-choice exams in a psychology subject. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 7(3), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.202536891
  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  • Broadbent, J., & Lodge, J. M. (2021). Self-regulated learning in online environments: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1427–1459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09618-0
  • Broadbent, J., Sharman, S. J., Panadero, E., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2021). How does self-regulated learning influence formative assessment and summative grade? Comparing online and blended learners. The Internet and Higher Education, 50, Article 100805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100805
  • Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
  • de Bruin, A. B. H., & van Gog, T. (2012). Improving self-monitoring and self-regulation: From cognitive psychology to the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.01.003
  • de Bruin, A. B. H., Roelle, J., Carpenter, S. K., Baars, M., & EFG-MRE. (2020). Synthesizing cognitive load and self-regulation theory: A theoretical framework and research agenda. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 903–915. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09576-4
  • Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students: A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 231–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x
  • Dignath, C., Büttner, G., & Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003
  • Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist, 13(4), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.277
  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Rev. ed.). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5657.001.0001
  • Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2010). The measurement of learners’ self-regulated cognitive and metacognitive processes while using computer-based learning environments. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 203–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2010.515935
  • Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2018). Self-regulation, co-regulation, and shared regulation in collaborative learning environments. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed., pp. 83–106). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315697048-6
  • Hattie, J. A. C., & Donoghue, G. M. (2016). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 1, Article 16013. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.13
  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
  • Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A literature review. Pearson.
  • Lai, C.-L., & Hwang, G.-J. (2016). A self-regulated flipped classroom approach to improving students’ learning performance in a mathematics course. Computers & Education, 100, 126–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.006
  • OECD. (2022). Education at a glance 2022. https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en
  • OECD. (2023). OECD digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en
  • Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 422. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
  • Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219–225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
  • Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1–2), 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033
  • Schraw, G., & Gutierrez, A. P. (2015). Metacognitive strategy instruction that highlights the role of monitoring and control processes. In A. Peña-Ayala (Ed.), Metacognition: Fundaments, applications, and trends: A profile of the current state-of-the-art (pp. 3–16). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11062-2_1
  • Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(2), 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033
  • Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., … Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
  • UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. https://www.unesco.org/en/futures-education/report-resources
  • United Nations. (2020). Sustainable Development Goals report 2020. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2020
  • Winne, P. H., & Azevedo, R. (2022). Metacognition and self-regulated learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (3rd ed., pp. 93–113). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888295.007
  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts et al. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7
LICENSE
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.