Abstract
This study investigated the effect of metacognitive regulation (McR) intervention on attention-deficit–hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) students’ astronomy knowledge acquisition and learning motivation. Through a cognitive-behavioural treatment design, this study selected 97 ADHD learners who had poor academic performance. This study divided ADHD students randomly into one experimental group and one control group. After 15 weeks of intervention, results showed that the experimental group students performed significantly better than the control group in scientific abilities, learning motivation, and metacognition. Results suggested that the McR intervention is an effective approach for improving the ADHD students’ science knowledge learning abilities.
Highlights
Metacognitive regulation (McR) refers to an ability to modify cognitive processes and strategies to remain in control of their learning conflicts; it describes how students monitor and control their knowledge acquisition process (Zimmerman, 1995; Fernandez-Duque et al, 2000; Efklides, 2008)
The instructor required experimental group (EG) students to conduct metacognitive regulation (McR) practices at the last 10 min of the session, whilst EG students were required to evaluate their performance of astronomy knowledge acquisition and observe whether they had already achieved the expected performance requested by the school syllabus
This study has confirmed that the instructional approach of McR is effective in enhancing the attention-deficit–hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) students’ metacognition development, science knowledge learning motivation, and scientific ability development
Summary
Metacognitive regulation (McR) refers to an ability to modify cognitive processes and strategies to remain in control of their learning conflicts; it describes how students monitor and control their knowledge acquisition process (Zimmerman, 1995; Fernandez-Duque et al, 2000; Efklides, 2008). The current literature has demonstrated the value of team-based learning when supervised by an instructor at the McR intervention (Schraw et al, 2006; De Backer et al, 2016; Hadwin et al, 2017) During this format intervention, previous studies report that students explicitly felt the need to regulate the learning interactions amongst instructors, peers, presented knowledge, and the learning processes taking place because they are reminded or required to engage in the collaborative goal set by the instructor and attend conceptual discussions with peers or groupmates, to control their own comprehension and check on learning outcomes collaboratively (De Backer et al, 2016; Hadwin et al, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
