Advances in Asian Social Science (AASS) (ISSN 2167-6429)
Vol. 6, No. 3, 2015, Pages: 1045-1052
Copyright © World Science Publisher, United States
www.worldsciencepublisher.org
1045
Do Better Critical Thinkers Use Metacognitive Learning Strategies More
Frequently?
1
Mansoor Fahim, 2Parastu Dorrimanesh*
Department of English Language, College of Foreign Languages and Literature, Tehran Science
and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Email:1 [email protected]
2
[email protected]
Abstract – Critical thinking and metacognition are both associated with higher order thinking. In this study we intended to
explore the association between students’ level of Critical Thinking and their use of Metacognitive Learning Strategies as an
indicator of students’ level of autonomy and achieving lifelong learning. It was our aim to see whether better critical
thinkers use metacognitive learning strategies more frequently. In other words, it was of interest to find out whether critical
thinking contributes to achieving independence in learning. To do so, two questionnaires were administered to university
students of English as a foreign language. One questionnaire was intended to assess their level of critical thinking and the
other, their use of metacognitive learning strategies. The results revealed the existence of a positive relationship between the
two variables at α < 0.01; suggesting that critical thinking is associated with independence in learning; hence it should be
enhanced.
Keywords: Metacognitive learning strategies; Critical thinking; Autonomy, Lifelong learning
1. Introduction
The concepts of independence, autonomy and control in
learning experiences have gained an increasingly important
role in language education. A number of principles
contribute to strengthening independent language learning
– optimizing or extending learner choice, focusing on
individual learner needs, and facilitating learner decisionmaking. Independent language learning is an indication of a
move towards more learner-centered approaches. It views
learners as individuals with needs and rights, capable of
developing and exercising responsibility for their own
learning. This perspective has had significant consequences
one of which being the development of a range of means to
raise learners’ awareness and knowledge of themselves,
their learning needs and preferences, their beliefs and
motivation and the strategies they use to develop target
language competence (White, 2008).
Autonomous L2 learners develop independence and take
responsibility for their own learning. This involves, at least
in part, making decisions about learning strategies and
tactics that are relevant to their tasks in hand and goals. L2
learning strategies are the goal-oriented actions or steps
(e.g. plan, evaluate, analyze) taken by the learners with
some degree of consciousness, with the aim of enhancing
their L2 learning (Oxford, 2008).
Hacker, Dunlosky, and Graesser (2009) believe that
successful students take charge of their own learning. This,
at a minimum, requires students to be aware of their
learning, to evaluate their learning needs, to generate
strategies to meet their needs, and to implement those
strategies. Self-awareness, self-determination, and selfdirection are the characteristics that Kluwe (1982) used
when he described people as “agents of their own thinking”
(p. 222).
As agents of their own thinking, learners construct their
understanding of themselves and the world, control their
thoughts and behaviors, and monitor the results. There is a
sense of agency in metacognition which puts the focus of
attention clearly on the individual learner (Hacker,
Dunlosky & Graesser, 2009), that is, on independent
learning which aids learning in general and language
learning in particular. Regarding the role of autonomy in
language learning, Nunan (2000) maintains that it seems
the relevant research suggest that the process of second
language learning will be most effective if learners be
given the opportunity to become autonomous.
Autonomy is an approach to learning through which
learners take significant responsibility for their own
learning "over and above responding to instruction" (Bound,
1988, p. 23, as cited in Finch, 2002).
Macaro (2008) views autonomy of language learning
competence as the ability to use various combinations of
cognitive and metacognitive strategies in a way that
completing a task or learning in general can take place both
along with the help of teacher’s approaches and techniques,
or independently of
the teacher’s approaches and
techniques or even in contradiction to them.
1046
With the growing interest in metacognition, we have a
chance to look at the learner in a more full-blown
complexity, the self-aware agent who can construct his or
her understanding of the world (Hacker, Dunlosky &
Graesser, 2009).
Gao and Zhang (2011) argue that metacognition and
agency can be conceptualized as prerequisites for learners’
autonomous learning and that both contribute to our
understanding of the processes underlying learners’
autonomy. Furthermore, by gaining this understanding we
become capable of offering informed support to their
learning efforts.
Questioning is an important metacognitive resource, as
was recognized nearly 25 years ago by Gavelek and
Raphael (1985, as cited in Otero, 2009). This relates
metacognition to critical thinking. As Anderson (2002) has
put it, using metacognitive learning strategies ignites
learners' thinking and can result in better learning outcomes.
1.1. Metacognitive learning strategies
Metacognitive skills consist of a series of competencies
for learning and thinking. They include a number of skills
required for active learning, critical thinking, reflective
judgment, problem solving, and decision-making (some
researchers argue that these are components of
metacognition). Those with well developed metacognitive
skills have a higher motivation for learning and are better at
regulating their emotions in different situations, handling
complexities and coping with conflict. Although, once
mastered, these skills can become habits of mind applied in
various contexts, even the most skillful learners need to
“flex their cognitive muscles”. This can be done by
applying suitable metacognitive skills to new knowledge
and in new situations (Dawson, 2008).
Effective use of metacognitive learning strategies
enhances language learning, that is, when learners reflect
upon their learning they become better prepared to make
conscious decisions about what they can do to improve
their learning (Anderson, 2008). By stating that “students
without metacognitive approaches are essentially learners
without direction or opportunity to plan their learning,
monitor their progress, or review their accomplishments
and future learning directions,” O’Malley and Chamot
(1990, p. 8) emphasize the importance of metacognitive
learning strategies to a great extent.
Oxford too believes in the significance of metacognitive
learning strategies and states that these strategies "allow
learners to control their cognition, that is, to coordinate the
learning process by using functions such as centering,
arranging, planning, and evaluating" (1990, p. 135).
Training students to use metacognitive learning
strategies effectively can strengthen their self-confidence
and increase their sense of responsibility for their own
learning which will possibly lead to the development of a
higher level of motivation for learning (Schunk, 1990).
Therefore, Metacognitive strategies should be embedded in
assignments and classroom activities across the curriculum
at every level of instruction (Garner & Alexander, 1989).
Metacognitive strategies are not domain-specific. As a
result, to find out about ways of obtaining knowledge in a
new domain, intelligent learners can use general
metacognitive strategies. Once they have mastered using
these strategies in one domain, they can use them more
readily and skillfully in other domains as well (Mathan &
Koedinger, 2005).
Considering the definition of metacognition which can
simply be stated as ‘thinking about thinking’ (Anderson,
2002) or better stated by Moore and Parker (2012) as
‘critiquing thinking’, one can detect a strong tie between
the two concepts of metacognition and critical thinking.
1.2. Critical thinking
Critical thinking has been defined from different
perspectives. For example, Scriven and Paul (1987)
believe that it is the intellectually disciplined process which
acts as a guide to belief and action. Through this process
one can actively and skillfully conceptualize, apply,
analyze, synthesize, and/or evaluate information collected
from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection,
reasoning, or communication. It is based on some universal
intellectual values such as clarity, accuracy, precision,
consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons,
depth, breadth, and fairness.
Paul and Elder (2008) define it as the art of analyzing
and evaluating thinking with the aim of improving it. They
see it as "self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and
self-corrective thinking. It requires rigorous standards of
excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails
effective communication and problem solving abilities and
a commitment to overcoming our native egocentrism and
sociocentrism" (p. 2).
A brief definition of critical thinking is offered by
Cottrell (2005). She defines critical thinking as “a cognitive
activity, associated with using the mind” (p. 1).
As it can be seen, a variety of definitions has been
offered for critical thinking. Most of them, however, have
similar underlying principles. That is, all of these
approaches share a set of common assumptions: there are
identifiable critical thinking skills that are teachable and
learnable, and that when students learn these skills and use
them appropriately, they achieve higher levels of critical
thinking (Halpern, 1999).
According to Beyer (1999), there are ten kinds of
critical thinking judgments that are not domain or subject
specific and can he used to ascertain the truth, accuracy,
or plausibility of a communication and they are:


claims,



Distinguishing the relevant from the irrelevant;
Distinguishing between verifiable facts, value
and reasoned opinions;
Determining factual accuracy;
Determining the credibility of a source;
Identifying ambiguous claims or arguments;
1047





 Procedures for Applying Criteria: "Critical
thinking does not use a single, general procedure.
Rather, a number of procedures,
including
asking questions and making judgments, are
initialed, informed, and driven by what we know
1) about a subject or domain, 2) about the kinds
of judgments that can or should be made, and 3}
about the criteria we need to use" (p. 18).
Identifying and examining unstated assumptions;
Detecting bias;
Identifying logical fallacies;
Identifying logical inconsistencies; and
Determining the strength of an argument (pp. 13-
14).
Beyer (1999) also elaborates on essential aspects of
critical thinking:
 Dispositions: "Sometimes referred to as habits of
mind, dispositions are habitual ways of behaving.
Good critical thinkers are disposed to skepticism,
questioning
the
accuracy,
authenticity,
plausibility, or sufficiency of what- ever is
presented to them…. Critical thinkers are
skeptical, open-minded, value fair-mindedness,
respect evidence and reasoning, respect clarity and
precision, consider different points of view, and
are willing to change positions when reason and
evidence warrant" (pp. 10-11).
 Criteria: To think critically, one must apply
criteria. Some common standards apply to all
subject areas. "Thus to be accepted as truthful,
an assertion must, at the very least, be: based on
relevant, accurate facts; based on credible
sources: precise, unbiased, free from logical
fallacies; logically consistent;
and strongly
reasoned" (p. 12).
 Argument: "an argument is a proposition with its
supporting evidence and reasoning …. Critical
thinking requires skill at identifying arguments
and distinguishing them from other forms of
communication, such as narratives, descriptions,
and explanations.
It also requires skill in
evaluating and in constructing arguments" (pp.
15-16).
 Reasoning: It is what holds an argument
together… In critical thinking we attempt to
ascertain the strength of a conclusion by
examining reasoning and logical relationships….
We think critically
about reasoning
and
reasons so that we can 1) determine how wellgrounded conclusions are and 2) strengthen
weak conclusions by finding stronger grounds
and establishing tighter logical relationships" (p.
17).
 Point of View: "One's point of view is literally
the position from which one perceives and
makes meaning of anything… A person's point
of view shapes what he or she chooses to observe,
read, or attend to. It is like a filler; as experience
passes through it, it s transformed… Critical
thinkers, in their search for soundness and
accuracy,
examine datum, assertions,
conclusions, and other information from many
different points of view in order to understand it
completely" (pp. 17-18).
2. Significance of the Study
One of the aims of modern education is training students
to become autonomous learners. However, unfortunately,
as Nunan (2003) puts it, few learners come into any given
learning arrangement with the knowledge, skills and
attitudes that allow them to take part in their own learning.
Those teachers committed to concepts of autonomy must,
therefore, help their learners to develop the relevant
knowledge and skills. In addition to setting language
content goals, teachers can incorporate a set of learning
process goals into their teaching as well.
In order to help learners through the process of
achieving autonomy, it is important to identify factors that
can facilitate this process. One of the factors that have been
known to aid learners in this regard is the appropriate use
of metacognitive learning strategies (Zahedi&Dorrimanesh,
2008).
Having accepted the role of metacognitive learning
strategies in learning in general and language learning in
particular, it is of paramount significance to identify factors
associated with this type of learning strategy. The factor
chosen in this study was critical thinking which is closely
associated with metacognitive learning strategies.
According to Koivista and Jokinen (2006), critical
autonomous reflective learning not only affects the
individual but it affects the society in large. Therefore,
higher education should prepare students for becoming
responsible citizens and for the labor market. Societies
need citizens who are open to a greater critical
understanding and adaptability. The aim of higher
education should be to facilitate the process of developing a
greater ability to anticipate, trigger and take account of
change, that is, to become a critical and autonomous person
and worker. As workers, critical autonomous people are the
ones who are aware of and able to interpret the signs of
change in a continuously evolving labor market.
Critical thinking is a valuable skill for anyone,
especially students, to master. Instead of relying on
teachers and classroom time for instruction and guidance,
students with high levels of critical thinking skills become
more independent, self-directed learners because critical
thinking enables students to assess their learning styles,
strengths and weaknesses, and allows them to take
ownership of their education (Morgan, n. d.).
Students who are capable of analyzing and critiquing
ideas can make connections across disciplines and see
knowledge as useful and applicable to daily life. In addition,
I
1048
they have the ability to understand content on a deeper and
longer lasting level (Paul & Elder, 2010).
In order to find out whether better critical thinkers use
metacognitive learning strategies more frequently, that is,
to see whether they are more autonomous, the following
research hypothesis was formulated:
H0: There is no statistically significant relationship
between the level of critical thinking and the use of
metacognitive learning strategies among EFL university
students.
3. Methodology
3. 1. Participants
The participants in this study were 121 university
students of EFL measuring either in English literature or in
translation. The sample consisted of 40 males and 81
females with their age ranging from 17 to 55. The method
used for selecting the participants was convenience
sampling.
3.2. Instruments
To collect the needed data, two questionnaires were
administered to the same group of participants; one for
estimating participants’ level of critical thinking and the
other for estimating their use of metacognitive learning
strategies.
3.2.1. Critical thinking questionnaire: To estimate
students’ level of critical thinking the Persian translation of
Peter Honey’s (2003) questionnaire by Naieni (2005) was
used. This 30 item questionnaire aims to evaluate
participants’ skills of analysis, inference, evaluation, and
reasoning on a 5 point Likert scale. The participants were
asked to indicate their response (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) to each
item (1. Never or almost never true of me, 2. Generally not
true of me, 3. Somewhat true of me, 4. Generally true of me,
and 5. Always or almost always true of me). Therefore, the
score of each participant could be between 30 and 1501
with better critical thinkers’ scores being higher than the
weaker ones.
The estimated reliability of the questionnaire calculated
by Naieni (2005) was found to be 0.86. In this study,
however, reliability of the questionnaire was estimated to
be 0.79, using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient.
3.2.2. Metacognitive learning strategies questionnaire:
To measure the use of metacognitive learning strategies,
part D of Oxford's (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language
Learning (SILL) was used. According to Chamot (2004),
1
In order to facilitate the comparison of the means of critical
thinking and metacognitive learning strategies scores, both
scores were converted to a total test score on a 1 - 100 point
basis.
most descriptive studies have used this questionnaire
developed by Oxford. The inventory is based on a 5 point
Likert-scale for which the participants are asked to indicate
their response (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) to a strategy description (1.
Never or almost never true of me, 2. Generally not true of
me, 3. Somewhat true of me, 4. Generally true of me, and 5.
Always or almost always true of me).
Oxford (1990) has developed the SILL in two versions.
Version 5.1 contains a total of 80 items of which 16 items
estimate the use of metacognitive learning strategies by
English speakers who are learning a foreign language.
Version 7.0 contains 50 items of which 9 items estimate the
use of metacognitive learning strategies by EFL and ESL
students. In regards to version 7.0, Oxford states that: "The
language is very simplified, but this version [version 7.0]
operates similarly to Version 5.1 in most other respects"
(Oxford, 1990, p. 199). Therefore, it was decided to use
part D of 5.1 Version which contained 16 items. However,
to minimize the possible effect of misinterpretations of the
questionnaire's items by some participants, it was decided
to use the Persian version of the questionnaire translated
and validated by Dorrimanesh (2008).
Regarding the reliability and validity of the inventory,
Oxford & Burry-Stock (1995) have stated that it appears to
be the only language learning strategy instrument that has
been checked for reliability and validated in multiple ways
(as cited in Abu Shmais, 2002).
4. Results
The purpose in the current study was to find out whether
level of critical thinking is associated with the frequency of
using metacognitive learning strategies.
In order to check the linearity of the relationship, a
scattergram was drawn (Figure 1)
As the above figure shows, the data points cluster
around an imaginary straight line suggesting that the
relationship between the scores on metacognitive learning
strategies and critical thinking is linear.
In the following table the descriptive statistics of the
data are presented as evidence for linearity of the data
distribution for both critical thinking and metacognitive
learning strategies.
Based on the descriptive statistics of the data presented
in table 1, it can be said that the distribution of data for
critical thinking and metacognitive learning strategies is
normal as both skewness ratios and kurtosis ratios for
critical thinking and metacognitive learning strategies fall
within the range of -1.96 and +1.96.
1049
Figure 1. Linear relationship between Critical Thinking and Metacognitive Learning Strategies
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the data
N
Statistic
121
Statistic
68.2094
Mean
Std.
Error
1.11692
MLS
121
68.6777
1.21200
Valid N (listwise)
121
CT
Std. Deviation
Statistic
12.2861
1
13.3320
0
Statistic
-.097
-.119
Skewness
Std.
Error
.220
.220
Kurtosis
Std.
Statistic
Error
-.089
.437
-.438
.437
*CT = Critical Thinking, MLS = Metacognitive Learning Strategies
Table 2. Pearson Correlation between CT and MLS
CT
ML
S
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
CT
1
MLS
.507**
.000
121
.507**
.000
121
1
N
121
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
As displayed above, the correlation between the two
variables turned out to be r =.507 at p <.01, with the
strength of the relationship being 0.26.
121
The correlation between critical thinking and
metacognitive learning strategies shows significant values.
The direction of the relationships is all positive where the
1050
use of metacognitive learning strategies increases with the
scores on critical thinking. Furthermore, the common
variance (R²) being 0.26 indicates a large effect size
(Cohen, 1998). Therefore, the null research hypothesis is
rejected indicating that learners with higher levels of
critical thinking use metacognitive learning strategies more
often than the ones with lower levels.
5. Discussion and implications
The obtained results of the current study indicate that
level of critical thinking and the frequency of using
metacognitive learning strategies are significantly related,
meaning that the higher the level of critical thinking one
possesses, the more often that person uses metacognitive
learning strategies and therefore enjoys a higher level of
autonomy in learning.
In investigating the possible contribution of
metacognitive learning strategies to learning, Bransford et
al., 1986; Ewell-Kumar, 1999; and Heath, 1983 found that
students with good metacognitive skills are better critical
thinkers than the ones who are not; suggesting that it is
possible to develop better critical thinking skills in our
students by teaching them metacognitive learning strategies.
In addition, development of metacognitive skills is more
likely in areas of greater knowledge, since they involve the
intentional structuring of knowledge.
One way to possibly enhance learning is providing
explicit content knowledge during instruction and at the
same time asking students to apply metacognitive strategies
to use that knowledge (Perkins, 1987).
Receiving appropriate feedback from teachers helps
students in gaining a better understanding of the subject
matter under study and in transferring the acquired
knowledge and skill to other situations in a more effective
manner (Mathan & Koedinger, 2005). Therefore, by
providing feedback that encourages students to use their
critical thinking skills and apply metacognitive strategies
they have previously used in similar situations, teachers can
support students in using their existing skills in new areas
of knowledge.
It is also of great importance that teachers, in their
classrooms, emphasize understanding over covering the
content. According to Ames and AfIher (1988), students
will be deprived of the opportunity to learn and master
learning skills, if covering the content is of a higher priority
than understanding.
Another important issue is students’ active involvement
in thinking about a topic. It has been found that the quality
of reasoning about a topic can improve by active
engagement of students in thinking about the topic of their
leassons (Kuhn, Shaw, & Felton, 1997).
It is believed that students in problem based learning
situations develop higher levels of critical thinking and use
metacognitive learning strategies more often compared to
other students (Sungur & Tekkaya, 2006). Therefore, if we
intend to enhance our students’ critical thinking and
metacognitive strategies, that is, to train autonomous and
lifelong learners, we will need to put them in situations
where they are required to deal with problems.
It should be kept in mind that how one views learning
has a significant effect on one’s quality of strategy use and
subsequently on one’s learning outcome. Consequently, if
we believe that critical thinking plays a role in the
development of autonomy in our students, we will need to
make every effort we can to teach our students the skills
required for this type of thinking.
Critical thinking is associated with higher order thinking.
It is about judgment which is purposeful and reflective and
involves making decisions regarding the meaning and
significance of different phenomena, including different
text types (Wright, 2010). Therefore, it is vital to help
students develop as high level of critical thinking as
possible, if it is our aim to let learners take charge of their
own learning. If this is the aim, then students need to be
able to plan, monitor and evaluate their learning, that is, to
be proficient critical thinkers and strategy users.
It is a common belief that we are born with critical
thinking skills. Much of our thinking, however, is ‘biased,
distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced’.
Still, the quality of our thoughts is what the quality of our
life and that of what we produce, make, or build is
depended on. Therefore, systematic cultivation of
excellence in thought must be our top priority (Paul &
Elder, 2008).
The ability to think critically is a significant attribute for
all members of any society. Considering today’s
multinational, multicultural, complex issues, citizens must
be able to sift through large amounts of various data to
make intelligent decisions. Thinking critically must be a
focus of higher education in order to provide the
intellectual training for its students to participate in this
world (Binta, Bilics, & Lerch, 2012).
It should be noted that it will not be sufficient to teach
students the skills of critical thinking, if they do not intend
to use them. There is more to critical thinking than
successful application of the right skill in the appropriate
context. Recognizing when a skill is needed and having the
willingness to make the needed mental effort in applying it
are also significant. Therefore, having the right attitude or
disposition is of great value. Consequently, it is needed to
find ways of making students appreciate the value of a
higher level of thinking and help them to work toward
achieving it (Halpern, 1999).
Wright (2010) believes pedagogies that provide students
with collaboration and problem-solving situations have the
intention of involving students in critical thinking, and
support them to retain learning long after they first meet
new content and concepts. In this way, students are
encouraged to talk, ask questions, take risks, experiment,
reflect and share ideas. These can help learners in their
education by enhancing their abilities in evaluating and
critiquing the content of their lessons. Thus, these are
important skills that students need to master. Mastery of
these skills helps learners to be more than passive recipient
of information and helps them to become active creators of
information and knowledge.
1051
It can be said that critical thinking plays a determining
role in academic success of students (Fahim & Ahmadi,
2007) because the only way that a student can detect the
intent and viewpoint of authorities, judge reasons for
existence of specific content and make educated guesses as
to the reason for inclusion or exclusion of specific elements
in the content is to develop skills of higher order thinking.
For instance, when students understand the issues behind
the text they are reading, question the intent and
perspective of the author, and reflect upon them through the
encounter with the text, they are approaching the reading
task critically (McLeod & Vasinda, 2008). Considering the
significance of critical thinking skills in life in general and
in formal education in particular, teachers should make
their best efforts to teach the required skills to their students
and the fact that these skills may be unfamiliar, difficult
and culturally challenging for students does not justify
excluding them from their teaching (Vaseghi, Gholami,
&Barjesteh, 2012).
When students develop critical thinking skills along
with metacognitive learning strategies and become active
creators of information, the role of the teacher changes
from an authoritative figure to a facilitator. That is, teachers
no longer have the sole control over the content and
production of knowledge or information. They facilitate
opportunities for their students to become deeply involved
with critical and analytical thinking about various kinds of
texts and environments (Wright, 2010). All this leads to the
development of autonomy in learners which is the aim of
modern education. By developing autonomy in our students
we can hope that they become lifelong learners. That is,
they learn how to learn on their own.
The European Lifelong Learning Initiative defines
lifelong learning as “…a continuously supportive process
which stimulates and empowers individuals to acquire all
the knowledge, values, skills and understanding they will
require throughout their lifetimes and to apply them with
confidence, creativity and enjoyment, in all roles
circumstances, and environments.” (Watson, 2003, p. 3)
From the point of view of Soni (2012), lifelong learning
is an essential challenge for inventing the future of our
societies. She rightly maintains that it is a necessity rather
than a possibility or a luxury to be considered. Lifelong
learning is a mindset and a habit for people to acquire and
is more than adult education or training.
Lifelong learning is not just related to work, but is
related to life as a whole. It goes on through life and does
not necessarily lead to achieving formal qualifications.
In preparing students for becoming autonomous and
lifelong learners, we should keep in mind that lessons
which involve higher order thinking skills should be
communicated with particular clarity and with as little
ambiguity and confusion as possible. They should improve
the attitudes of students toward thinking activities.
Teachers should model thinking skills, provide examples of
critical way of thinking. Lessons should be designed in a
way to take into account diverse student needs. Teachers
should support students at the beginning of a lesson and
gradually prepare them to work independently; scaffolding
assists students in developing higher order learning skills.
Nonetheless, teachers should be aware that too much or too
little support can hamper learning (Goodson & Rohani,
1998). Fahim and Teimourtash (2012) also point out that in
order to promote the learners' critical thinking capabilities,
the teachers should not go to extremes.
Critical thinking which is a liberating force in education
and a powerful resource in personal and social life is an
essential tool of inquiry. Therefore, in training good critical
thinkers, educators should combine teaching critical
thinking skills with enhancing those dispositions which
consistently result in helpful insights and which form the
basis of a rational and democratic society (Facione, 1990,
as cited in Fahim & Nazari, 2012).
REFERENCES
[1] Abu Shmais, W. (2003). Language learning strategy use
in Palestine. TESL- EJ, 7(2).
[2] Ames, C., & AfIher, J. (1988). Achievement goals in
the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation
processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
[3] Anderson, N. J. (2008). Metacognition and good
language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons from good
language learners (pp. 99-109). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
[4] Beyer, B. K. (1995). Critical thinking. Bloomington, IN:
Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
[5] Binta, C. M., Bilics, A. R., & Lerch, C. M. (2012).
Reflection: A key component to thinking critically. The
Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning,
3
(1),
Article
2.
doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2012.1.2
[6] Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R., Vye, N. J., & Rieser, J.
(1986). Teaching thinking and problem solving. American
Psychologist, 41(10), 1078-1089.
[7] Chamot, A. U. (2004). Issues in language learning
strategy research and teaching. Electronic Journal of
Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 14−26.
[8] Cohen. J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the
behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
[9] Cottrell, S. (2005). Critical thinking skills: Developing
effective analysis and argument. Basingstoke, Hampshire
& New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[10] Dorrimanesh, P. (2008). The effect of metacognitive
learning strategies on academic success of EFL students in
distance education (Unpublished Master thesis). Payam-eNoor University, Tehran, Iran.
[11] Fahim, M., & Ahmadi, A. (2012). Critical thinking,
content schemata and EFL readers’ comprehension and
recall. Journal of Comparative Literature and Culture
(JCLC), 1 (2), 23-28.
[12] Fahim, M., & Nazari, O. (2012). Practicing action
research for enhancing critical thinking. Journal of Science
(JOS), 2 (1), 84-89.
1052
[13] Finch, A. (2002). Autonomy: Where are we? Where
are we going? JALT CUE-SIG Proceedings (pp. 15-2).
Retrieved from
http://www.finchpark.com/arts/autonomy/index.htm
[14] Gao, X., & Zhang, L. J. (2011). Joining forces for
synergy: Agency and metacognition as interrelated
theoretical perspectives on learner autonomy. In G. Murray,
X. Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and
autonomy in language learning (pp. 25-41). Bristol,
Buffalo, & Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
[15] Garner, R., & Alexander, P. A. (1989). Metacognition:
Answered and unanswered questions. Educational
Psychologist, 24(2), 143-158.
[16] Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.).
(2009). Handbook of metacognition in education. New
York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
[17] Halpern, D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking:
Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions
of a critical thinker. New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, 80, 69-74. doi: 10.1002/tl.8005
[18] Honey, P. (2000). Critical Thinking questionnaire.
Retrieved from Peter http:// www.Peter Honey
Publications.com
[19] King, F. J., Goodson, L., & Rohani, F. (1998). Higher
order thinking skills: Definitions, strategies, assessment.
Retrieved
from:
http://www.cala.fsu.edu/files/higher_order_thinking_skills.
pdf
[20] Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of
dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning. Cognition
and Instruction, 15(3), 287-315.
[21] Macaro, E. (2008). The shifting dimensions of
language learner autonomy. In T. Lamb, & H. Reinders
(Eds.), Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities,
and responses (pp. 47-62). Amsterdam & Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[22] McLeod, J., & Vasinda, S. (2008). Critical literacy and
Web 2.0: Exercising and negotiating power. Computers in
the
Schools,
25(3),
259-274.
doi:10.1080/07380560802394815
[23] Mathan, S., & Koedinger, K. R. (2005). Fostering the
intelligent novice: Learning from errors with metacognitive
tutoring. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 257-265.
[24] Moore, B. N., & Parker, R. (2012). Critical thinking
(10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
[25] Morgan, K. (n.d.). What Are the Benefits of Critical
Thinking
Skills?
Retrieved
from
http://classroom.synonym.com/benefits-critical-thinkingskills-3895.html
[26] Naeini, J. (2005). The effects of collaborative learning
on critical thinking of Iranian EFL learners (Unpublished
master’s thesis). Islamic Azad University at Central Tehran,
Iran.
[27] Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies:
What every teacher should know. USA: Heinle & Heinle.
[28] Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). The miniature guide for
students and faculty to scientific thinking. Foundation for
Critical Thinking, Dillon Beach, CA.
[29] Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2010). Critical thinking
development: A stage theory with implications for
instruction.
Retrieved
from
https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinkingdevelopment-a-stage-theory/483
[30] Perkins, D. (1987). Knowledge as design: Teaching
thinking through content. In J. B. R. Sternberg (Ed.),
Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice. New York,
NY: W. H. Freeman.
[31] Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy
during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist,
25, 71-86.
[32] Scriven, M. & Paul, R. (1987). Defining critical
thinking. Paper presented at the 8th Annual International
Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform. ,
Rohnert Park, CA. Retrieved March 27, 2014, from
http://www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/define_critical_thi
nking.cfm
[33] Soni, S. (2012). Lifelong learning - Education and
training.
Retrieved
from
https://www.fig.net/pub/fig2012/papers/ts05i/TS05I_soni_
5945.pdf
[34] Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Effects of problembased learning and traditional instruction on self-regulated
learning. Journal of Educational Research, 99(5), 307-317.
[35] Watson, L. (2003) Lifelong Learning in Australia,
Canberra, Department of Education, Science and Training.
Retrieved
from
vital.new.voced.edu.au/vital/access/services/Download/ngv
.../SOURCE2
[36] White, C. (2008). Language learning strategies in
independent language learning: An overview. In S. Hurd &
T. Lewis (Eds.), Language learning strategies in
independent settings (pp. 3-24). Bristol, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
[37] Wright, N. (2010). E-learning and implications for
New Zealand schools: A literature review. Welington, New
Zealand: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/ict/77614
[38] Zahedi, K. & Dorrimanesh, P. (2008). Metacognitive
learning strategies and academic success of TEFL M.A.
students in distance education. International Journal of
Criminology and Sociological Theory, 1 (2), 161-176.