Abstract
Globally, education improvement aims to address the critical area of quality teaching and learning. A common emphasis on quality tends to create a binary of ‘active’ teaching methods and rote learning, while the teaching and learning processes have remained a black box in many contexts. This study explores teaching practices in natural classroom settings to show how students were engaged in ways that foster high levels of learning in Vietnam. This study used qualitative data from teacher interviews and video observations from high- and low-performing classrooms in secondary schools across Vietnam. Findings show that metacognitive teaching strategies were employed by most teachers in high-performing classrooms, including: (a) explicit strategy instruction; (b) verbalising; (c) assessment integration; (d) consistent practice; and (e) positive learning environment. This study illuminates the classroom practices for fostering metacognition and suggests implications of how these practices can meaningfully contribute to improving learning quality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
Code availability
Not applicable.
Notes
In the Vietnamese context, ‘active learning’ can entail students taking charge of their own learning, an aspect similar to self-study. From this perspective, students are expected to apply learning methods and strategies for effective independent learning.
Student performance included students’ overall grades generated by subject teachers who taught these students. These school reports include students’ grades in the class (including their grades on homework and mid-term exams) and are not based on standardised tests.
In Vietnam, ‘curriculum’ often carries a narrow meaning that is associated with textbooks and lesson plans.
By only repeating or responding to content knowledge from the text.
See Deng & Gopinathan (2016) for an explanation of how ‘purpose-fit pedagogy’ helps Singaporean students to achieve outstanding results in international assessments such as PISA and TIMSS (p. 460).
See a fuller discussion about institutional barriers to classroom teaching and learning in Nguyen (2008).
References
Akturk, A. O., & Sahin, I. (2011). Literature review on metacognition and its measurement. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, 15, 3731–3736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.364
Alexander, R. J. (2001). Culture and Pedagogy: International Comparisons in Primary Education (1st ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Alexander, R. J. (2015). Teaching and learning for all? The quality imperative revisited. International Journal of Educational Development, 40, 250–258.
Asadullah, M. N., Perera, L. D. H., & Xiao, S. (2020). Vietnam’s extraordinary performance in the PISA assessment: a cultural explanation of an education paradox. Journal of Policy Modeling, 42(5), 913–932.
Barrett, A. M. (2007). Beyond the polarization of pedagogy: models of classroom practice in Tanzanian primary schools. Comparative Education, 43(2), 273–294.
Bonney, D. (2009). Metacognitive instruction in middle school science [Ed. D., Arizona State University].
Bremner, N. (2019). From learner-centred to learning-centred: becoming a ‘hybrid’ practitioner. International Journal of Educational Research, 97, 53–64.
Brown, A. L. (1997). Transforming schools into communities of thinking and learning about serious matters. American Psychologist, 52(4), 399.
Cao, T. H., Phi, V. T., & Nguyen, T. Q. H. (2020). Hình thành kĩ năng siêu nhận thức cho học sinh trong dạy học giải tích ở trường trung học phổ thông [Forming metacognitive skills for students in teaching calculus in high schools]. Vietnam Journal of Education, 483(1), 33–37.
Dang, H. A., Glewwe, P., Lee, J., & Vu, K. (2020). What explains Vietnam’s exceptional performance in education relative to other c? Analysis of the 2012 and 2015 PISA data (1st ed.) [Working Paper]. Research on Improving Systems of Education (RISE). https://doi.org/10.35489/BSG-RISE-WP_2020/036
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131.
Deng, Z., & Gopinathan, S. (2016). PISA and high-performing education systems: explaining Singapore’s education success. Comparative Education, 52(4), 449–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2016.1219535.
Deterding, N. M., & Waters, M. C. (2021). Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: a twenty-first-century approach. Sociological Methods & Research, 50(2), 708–739.
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.
Dignath, C., & Veenman, M. V. J. (2021). The role of direct strategy instruction and indirect activation of self-regulated learning—evidence from classroom observation studies. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 489–533.
EEF (2018). Metacognition and self-regulated learning: Guidance report. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Publications/Metacognition/EEF_Metacognition_and_self-regulated_learning.pdf
Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: what can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process? Educational Research Review, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001.
Ellis, A., Bond, J., & Denton, D. (2012). An analytical literature review of the effects of metacognitive teaching strategies in primary and secondary student populations. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Development, 1(1), 9–23.
Ellis, A. K., Denton, D. W., & Bond, J. B. (2014). An analysis of research on metacognitive teaching strategies. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 116(21), 4015–4024.
Filmer, D., Molina, E., & Wane, W. (2020). Identifying effective teachers: Lessons from four classroom observation tools (Working Paper No. 20/045). Research on Improving Systems of Education (RISE). https://doi.org/10.35489/BSG-RISEWP_2020/045
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906.
Grossman, P., Cohen, J., Ronfeldt, M., & Brown, L. (2014). The test matters: the relationship between classroom observation scores and teacher value added on multiple types of assessment. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 293–303.
Guthrie, G. (2011). The progressive education fallacy in developing countries. Netherlands: Springer.
Hafen, C. A., Hamre, B. K., Allen, J. P., Bell, C. A., Gitomer, D. H., & Pianta, R. C. (2015). Teaching through interactions in secondary school classrooms: revisiting the factor structure and practical application of the classroom assessment scoring system–secondary. The Journal of early adolescence, 35(5–6), 651–680.
Hoang Tuy. (2019). Giáo dục: Xin cho tôi nói thẳng [Education: let me speak honestly]. Vietnam: Thế Giới Publisher. Hanoi.
Hoang, X. B., & Phi, V. T. (2016). Bồi dưỡng kỹ năng siêu nhận thức cho học sinh thông qua giải bài tập hình học không gian ở trường THPT [Fostering metacognitive skills via geometric practice in an upper-secondary school]. Journal of Education, 1(385), 47–50.
Kipnis, M., & Hofstein, A. (2008). The inquiry laboratory as a source for development of metacognitive skills. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(3), 601–627.
Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., Büttner, G., & Klieme, E. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in classrooms: investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student performance. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9055-3.
Klette, K., & Blikstad-Balas, M. (2017). Observation manuals as lenses to classroom teaching: pitfalls and possibilities. European Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117703228.
Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: the effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 281–310.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: a literature review. Always Learning: Pearson Research Report, 24, 1–40.
Lattimer, H. (2015). Translating theory into practice: making meaning of learner centred education frameworks for classroom-based practitioners. International Journal of Educational Development, 45, 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2015.09.012.
Le, H. M. (2018). The reproduction of ‘best practice’: following Escuela Nueva to the Philippines and Vietnam. International Journal of Educational Development, 62, 9–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2018.02.005.
Le, T. T. (2016). Vận dụng lí thuyết siêu nhận thức trong dạy học môn toán ở trường trung học phổ thông [Applying metacognitive theories in teaching Mathematics in high schools]. Science, 82, 71–77.
Leutwyler, B. (2009). Metacognitive learning strategies: Differential development patterns in high school. Metacognition and Learning, 4(2), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-009-9037-5.
McAleavy, T., Tran, T. H., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2018). Promising practice: Government schools in Vietnam. Education Development Trust
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications Inc.
Nguyen, P. M. (2008). Culture and cooperation: Cooperative learning in Asian Confucian heritage cultures. The case of Viet Nam. Utrecht University.
Nguyen, V. T. (2012). Rèn luyện kĩ năng siêu nhận thức cho học sinh lớp 7 trong dạy học toán về tỉ lệ thức [Training metacognitive skills in learning about proportionality in grade seven]. Journal of Education, 290(7), 46–48.
Parandekar, S. D., & Sedmik, E. K. (2016). Unraveling a secret: Vietnam’s outstanding performance on the PISA test. The World Bank.
Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). Promoting metacognition and motivation of exceptional children. Remedial and Special Education, 11(6), 7–15.
Perry, J., Lundie, D., & Golder, G. (2019). Metacognition in schools: what does the literature suggest about the effectiveness of teaching metacognition in schools? Educational Review, 71(4), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1441127.
Phelps, R., Tran, H. T. N., Graham, A., & Geeves, R. (2012). But how do we learn? Talking to vietnamese children about how they learn in and out of school. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 289–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.04.003.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219–225.
Saito, E., Atencio, M., Khong, T. D. H., Takasawa, N., Murase, M., Tsukui, A., & Sato, M. (2016). The teacher as a ‘colony’: a case study of agentive responses to ‘colonising’ education policy in Vietnam. Cambridge Journal of Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016.1240151.
Scharlach, T. D. (2008). START comprehending: Students and teachers actively reading text. The Reading Teacher, 62(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.62.1.3
Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36(1), 111–139.
Stewart, J., & Landine, J. (1995). Study skills from a metacognitive perspective. Guidance & Counselling, 11(1), 16–20.
Stigler, J. W., Gallimore, R., & Hiebert, J. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 87–100.
Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: from grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186.
Tomáš, J., & Seidel, T. (Eds.). (2013). The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom. BoD–Books on Demand.
Tsukui, A., Saito, E., Sato, M., Michiyama, M., & Murase, M. (2017). The classroom observations of vietnamese teachers: mediating underlying values to understand student learning. Teachers and Teaching, 23(6), 689–703.
Veenman, M. V., Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective. Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 89–109.
Zepeda, C. D., Hlutkowsky, C. O., Partika, A. C., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2019). Identifying teachers’ supports of metacognition through classroom talk and its relation to growth in conceptual learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 522–541.
Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 121–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.847261
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our gratitude to the teachers who participated in this study, and the research team at Viện Khoa học Giáo dục Việt Nam (Vietnam Institute of Educational Sciences) who collected data and assisted with transcription in preparation for analysis. Our thanks also go to anonymous reviewers for providing constructive feedback that helped improve our manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by Oxford Policy Management, Grant No. A0268 RISE Directorate, POI 1963.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Joan DeJaeghere, Bich-Hang Duong and Vu Dao declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Consent to participate
Informed consent was obtained from all participants for being included in the study.
Consent for publication
Preliminary findings of this research have been presented at conferences and published as an Insight Note available at https://riseprogramme.org/publications/teaching-practices-support-and-promote-learning-qualitative-evidence-high-and-low.
Ethical approval
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Minnesota.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Summary of classroom practices and techniques that teachers used that were useful for metacognitive learning and development
Classroom practices and conditions conducive to metacognition | Examples of pedagogical techniques* | Examples of metacognitive learning* |
|---|---|---|
Explicit instruction | Direct instruction of knowledge and procedure Explaining the benefits of using the strategy Modelling of strategies | Metacognitive knowledge Planning skills |
Verbalising | Verbalising during demonstration Clarifying the reasoning of students’ answers Encouraging students to self-talk/think aloud (via answer checking, metacognitive prompts, guided group discussion, and class dialogue) | Metacognitive knowledge Planning and monitoring skills |
Integrating assessment | Self-/peer assessment Assessment of previous performance Guided reflection Checklist/Summary table/Mind map Inquiry-based learning Group discussion Class dialogue | Monitoring and evaluating skills |
Consistent practice | Guided practice with teacher help and feedback Independent practice Repetition | Planning, monitoring, and evaluating skills |
Positive learning environment | Check-in with students about what they find confusing, difficult, or easy Positive support Safe and engaging learning climate | Metacognitive knowledge and experiences |
Appendix 2: Teachers’ questions used to support students’ higher-order thinking
Example questions | Teacher’s purposes |
|---|---|
Questions (at the beginning of the class) to review the previous lesson and lead in the new lesson on smoking: How does nylon do harm to our life? What have you done in practice after learning about Earth Day? How do you see our environment can be harmed by other human activities? | Assess students’ prior knowledge and application in real life and connect with new content |
What do you notice about the title of the essay? What else do you see (in this paragraph)? Why does the author use it (this way of expression)? Do you agree or disagree with your friend’s statement? Do you want to add any more ideas? What is the evidence for this argument? How strong is it? What is your point again? Can you explain with other expressions for it? Does your idea apply in this situation? Any other ways of answering the question? | Assess students’ reading skills; ask them to identify reading strategies in analysing the essay Encourage self-assessment and peer assessment Ask students to evaluate the quality of the author’s argument; ask to apply their reasoning in other situations (critical thinking) Ask for additional/alternative answers (creative thinking) |
What are the risks of smoking for smokers and those who are around them? Do you recall the description in the story “Lao Hac” in which the character is a smoker? How does he feel when he smokes? How does he look? | Connect with knowledge students learned in prior classes |
To what extent does smoking affect other people? Is it also one of the reasons that lead to, for example……? (the teacher let the class complete the questions with various answers) So how do you see the negative effects on the whole society? What about the solutions to the problem of smoking? What advice do you give to your family members who smoke? | Assess how students apply learned understanding and skills in real life |
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
DeJaeghere, J., Duong, BH. & Dao, V. Quality of teaching and learning: the role of metacognitive teaching strategies in higher-performing classrooms in Vietnam. Educ Res Policy Prac 22, 239–258 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-023-09330-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-023-09330-x