Impact of collaborative STEAM learning on the development of metacognitive skills in students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20251603Keywords:
collaborative learning, STEAM, metacognition, self-regulation, educationAbstract
This study was conducted to understand how collaborative learning within a STEAM framework had influenced the development of metacognitive skills among primary and secondary students, considering the persistent challenges of cognitive self-regulation in Latin American educational contexts. The general objective was to determine the impact of this interdisciplinary methodology on students’ planning, monitoring, and self-assessment abilities. A mixed-method sequential explanatory design was applied, including pretest and posttest questionnaires administered to 600 students and semi-structured interviews with 100 teachers. The results showed significant improvements in students’ ability to organize study strategies, evaluate their performance, and reflect on the cognitive processes used. Teachers' interviews supported these findings, describing increased autonomy, active participation, and meaningful engagement in collaborative tasks. Overall, the STEAM intervention enabled students to develop greater metacognitive awareness, demonstrating that disciplinary integration and cooperative work constituted effective pathways for enhancing cognitive self-regulation and promoting deeper learning.
References
1. Hacioglu Y, Gulhan F. The effects of STEM education on the students’ critical thinking skills and STEM perceptions. J Educ Sci Environ Health. 2021;7(2):139-55. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.771331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.771331
2. Shongwe B. El efecto del aprendizaje basado en problemas STEM en las creencias de los estudiantes sobre la resolución de problemas matemáticos. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2024;20(8):em2486. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14879. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14879
3. Darling-Hammond L, Hyler ME, Gardner M. Teacher Professional Development Effective: Research Report. Learning Policy Institute; 2017. https://doi.org/10.54300/122.311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54300/122.311
4. Prada Núñez R, Peñaloza Tarazona ME, Rodríguez Moreno J. Tendencias y desafíos de la integración del enfoque STEAM en la educación: Una revisión de la literatura en Scopus. Datos y metadatos [Internet]. 4 de septiembre de 2024 [citado el 9 de diciembre de 2025];3:424. https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2024.424. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2024.424
5. Schraw G, Dennison RS. Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemp Educ Psychol. 1994;19(4):460-75. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
6. Zimmerman BJ. Becoming a self-regulated learner: an overview. Theory Pract. 2002;41(2):64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
7. Okolie UC, Mlanga S, Oyerinde DO, Olaniyi NO, Chucks ME. Collaborative learning and student engagement in practical skill acquisition. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2022;59(6):669–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2021.1929395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2021.1929395
8. Sarıoğlan AB, Şentürk Özkaya Ö. Web integrated STEM learning: effects on students’ academic achievement, creativity and metacognitive awareness. J Sci Learn. 2023;6(3):–. doi:10.17509/jsl.v6i3.56477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v6i3.56477
9. Hastuti ID, Surahmat, Sutarto, Dafik. Development of collaborative inquiry-based learning model to improve elementary school students’ metacognitive ability. Int J Sci Technol Res. 2020;9(2):1240–1246.
10. Vygotsky LS, Cole M, Jolm-Steiner V, Scribner S, Souberman E. La mente en la sociedad: desarrollo de procesos psicológicos superiores. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1978. 174 p. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
11. Dueñas M, Salazar A, Ojeda B, de Sola H, Failde I. Implementation and evaluation of collaborative active learning methods in the teaching of Public Health in Physiotherapy. Educ Med. 2016;17(4):164-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2016.05.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2016.05.001
12. Saigí Rubió F. Social networks for teaching and learning: the case of the telemedicine laboratory. Gac Sanit. 2011;25(3):254-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2010.11.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2010.11.008
13. Nieto Morales ML, Linares Bello CC, Fernández Esteban MI. Collaborative work as an innovative teaching method: Benefits and challenges. Radiología. 2025;67(6):101553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rx.2023.12.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rxeng.2025.101553
14. Muñoz-Osuna FO, Arvayo-Mata KL, Villegas-Osuna CA, González-Gutiérrez FH, Sosa-Pérez OA. The collaborative method as an alternative for experimental work in Organic Chemistry. Educ Quím. 2014;25(4):464-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(14)70068-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(14)70068-0
15. Johnson DW, Johnson RT. Aprendizaje cooperativo en el siglo XXI. An. psicol. [Internet]. 4 de agosto de 2014 [citado el 9 de diciembre de 2025];30(3):841-5.. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.201241 DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.201241
16. Hattie J. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge; 2009. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332
17. Torío López S, Fernández García CM, Inda Caro MM. Evaluation of an experiential program for parents: Educators as agents of change. Aula Abierta. 2016;44(1):31-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aula.2015.05.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aula.2015.05.001
18. Rodríguez Ortega M, Huerta Cebrián P, Valencia Rodríguez C, Montano Navarro E, Ortega Latorre Y. Educational innovation with social networks applied to the subject of Public Health. Educ Med. 2023 May–Jun;24(3):100798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2023.100798 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2023.100798
19. Torres-Lacomba M, Yuste-Sánchez MJ, Navarro-Brazález B, Vergara-Pérez F. Razonamiento clínico en fisioterapia en especialidades clínicas: una innovación educativa en la práctica. Fisioterapia. 2023 May;45(Suppl 1):S42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ft.2023.03.093 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ft.2023.03.093
20. Kirschner PA, Sweller J, Clark RE. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educ Psychol. 2006;41(2):75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
21. European Commission. The new EU agenda for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2017.9
22. Pérez-García E. Viabilidad de una intervención basada en la web y en la telefonía móvil para apoyar el autocuidado en pacientes ambulatorios con dolor por cáncer. Enfermería Clínica. 2017;27(2):132-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2016.12.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2016.12.001
23. Santiago Pescador S, Lantarón Caeiro E, Justo Cousiño L. How to do a bachelor's thesis: a guide for dummies. Experience of an educational innovation project. Fisioterapia. 2024 Jul;46(Suppl 1):S39–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0211-5638(24)60087-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0211-5638(24)60087-8
24. Silva Calpa AC, Martínez Delgado DG. Influencia del smartphone en los procesos de enseñanza y aprendizaje. Suma de Negocios. 2017;8(17):11-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sumneg.2017.01.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sumneg.2017.01.001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 José Fabricio Cabrera Toro, María Alejandra Cordero Apolo, María Marcela Cabrera Toro, Daniel Fernando Cabrera Toro (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
