Metacognitive Wrappers as Reflection Materials for Modular Approach in Science Teaching
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23940868Keywords:
metacognition, reflective learning, modular instruction, science education, teacher validation, expert evaluation, self-regulated learning, instructional materialsAbstract
Modular science learning requires learners to work with greater independence, making reflection and self-monitoring important supports for learning. This study determined the factors to consider when drafting metacognitive wrappers for modular science teaching, examined science teachers’ and science experts’ validation of the wrappers in terms of activity, assessment, and analysis, and used their assessments to guide wrapper development. The study employed a descriptive qualitative approach, using phenomenology and content analysis. Participants included 10 junior high school science teachers and 8 science experts from the Schools Division of Iloilo City and the Division of Iloilo. Data were gathered through a researcher-made questionnaire and interview schedule; instruments were reviewed by a panel of validators. Interviews were analyzed thematically, while content analysis was used to examine validation feedback. Findings identified five considerations in drafting wrappers: learners’ cognitive level, relevance to the topic, engagement, time, and evaluation and feedback. Teachers’ validation of activities emphasized clarity and structure, relevance, and engagement; assessment considerations included preassessment, activities during assessment, post-assessment, and analysis of results; and analysis considerations included identifying strategies, determining their effectiveness, planning improvements, and making instructional adjustments. Experts emphasized alignment with learning objectives, target audience, specificity, curriculum integration, reflective prompts, manageable process-oriented reflection, feedback mechanisms, metacognitive strategies, real-world application, differentiation, and evaluation and revision. The study concluded that these elements can guide the design and refinement of metacognitive wrappers as reflective materials for modular science instruction. Further classroom implementation and evaluation are recommended.
Downloads
References
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dangle, Y. R. P., & Sumaoang, J. D. (2020). The implementation of modular distance learning in the Philippine secondary public schools. 3rd International Conference on Advanced Research in Teaching and Education.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive– developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Kimberlin, C. L., & Winterstein, A. G. (2008). Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65(23), 2276–2284.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Angeros M. Solidarios (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
