The main goal of this scientific research is to study the effectiveness of the practical application of the collaboration model, which is based on the cognitive and metacognitive activity of students, using the public Quip platform, accompanied by metacognitive training to develop students’ metacognition. The educational experiment was conducted with the participation of first-year master's students within the framework of the "Pedagogy and Psychology" educational program. The ascertaining tool was the group metacognition scale (GMS) questionnaire. Results were obtained demonstrating the positive impact of the considered format of teaching students on the development of metacognition, as evidenced by the results of the Group Metacognition Scale.
BiasuttiM.FrateS. (2018). Group metacognition in online collaborative learning: Validity and reliability of the group metacognition scale (GMS). Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(6), 1321–1338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9583-0
2.
BorgeM.AldemirT.XiaY. (2019). Unpacking socio-metacognitive sense-making patterns to support collaborative discourse. CSCL Proceedings, 2019, 320–327.
3.
ÇiniA.MalmbergJ.JarvelaS. (2020). How individual metacognitive awareness relates to situation-specific metacognitive interpretations of collaborative learning tasks. Educational Studies, 1(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1834359
4.
CoiM. M.KuoS. W. (2009). Social metacognition in groups: Benefits, difficulties, learning and teaching. In Metacognition: New research developments (pp. 117–136). Nova Science Publishers.
5.
DindarM.JarvelaS.JarvenojaH. (2020). Interplay of metacognitive experiences and performance in collaborative problem solving. Computers & Education, 154(1), 103922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103922
6.
EfklidesA. (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
7.
GuoL. (2020). Teachers’ meditation in students’ development of cognition and metacognition. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 1(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2020.1846158
8.
HaatajaE.DindarM.MalmbergJ.JarvelaS. (2022). Individuals in a group: Metacognitive and regulatory predictors of learning achievement in collaborative learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 96(1), 102146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102146
9.
HurmeT. R.JarvelaS.MerenluotoK.SalonenP. (2015). What makes metacognition as socially shared in mathematical problem solving? In Metacognition: Fundaments, applications, and trends (pp. 259–276). Springer.
JarvelaS.KirschnerP. A.PanaderoE.MalmbergJ.PhielixC.JaspersJ.KoivuniemiM.JarvenojaH. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: Designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9358-1
12.
KaziS.KazaliE.MaknisN.SpanoudisG.DemetriouA. (2019). Cognizance in cognitive development: A longitudinal study. Cognitive Development, 52(1), 100805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2019.100805
13.
KhosaD. K.VoletS. E. (2014). Productive group engagement in cognitive activity and management regulation during collaborative learning: Can it explain differences in student’s conceptual understanding?Metacognition and Learning, 9(3), 287–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9117-z
14.
LaurillardD. (2009). The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-008-9056-2
15.
LobczowskiN. G.LyonsK.GreeneJ. A.McLaughlinJ. E. (2021). Socially shared metacognition in a project-based learning environment: A comparative case study. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 30(1), 100543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2021.100543
16.
MargaryanA.LittlejohnA.VojtG. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004
17.
MartirosovA. L.MoserL. R. (2021). Team-based learning to promote the development of metacognitive awareness and monitoring in pharmacy students. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 85(2), 848112. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe848112
18.
OrtegaJ.MontanesP.BarnhartA.KuhnG. (2018). Exploiting failures in metacognition through magic: Visual awareness as a source of visual metacognition bias. Consciousness and Cognition, 65(1), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2018.08.008
19.
ParkesM.SteinS.ReadingC. (2015). Student preparedness for university e-learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 25(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.10.002
20.
RanieriM. (2019). Teaching with media. The International Encyclopedia of Media Literacy, 1(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118978238.ieml0233
21.
RashidT.AsgharH. M. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human Behavior, 63(1), 604–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.084
22.
SeiradakisE. (2019). Socially-shared metacognitive regulation episodes between undergraduate engineering students during a collaborative genre analysis task in an English for academic purposes course. English Language Teaching, 12(6), 217–225. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n6p217
23.
SocratousC.IoannouA. (2019). An empirical study of educational robotics as tools for group metacognition and collaborative knowledge construction. In: Combining embodied, enactive, extended, and embedded learning in collaborative settings, 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) (pp. 192–199). Lyon: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
24.
Sylenko, Y. (2024). Individualization of independent work in the professional training of future teachers: An experimental study. Scientific Bulletin of Mukachevo State University. Series “Pedagogy and Psychology”, 10(1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.52534/msu–pp1.2024.68
25.
TengM. F. (2022). Effects of individual and group metacognitive prompts on tertiary-level students’ metacognitive awareness and writing outcomes. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31, 601–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00611-8
26.
van de BogartK. L.Dounas-FrazerD. R.LewandowskiH. J.StetzerM. R. (2017). Investigating the role of socially mediated metacognition during collaborative troubleshooting of electric circuits. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 020116. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.020116
27.
YilmazF. G. K.YilmazR. (2019). Impact of pedagogic agent-mediated metacognitive support towards increasing task and group awareness in CSCL. Computers & Education, 134(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.001
28.
ZhaoK. (2019). Enhancing metacognitive language learning strategy use and business language proficiency in technology-enhanced collaborative learning environment. In Computer-Assisted language learning: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 399–410). IGI Global.
