Artificial Intelligence-Supported Metacognitive Learning in Higher Education: A Narrative Review
Keywords:
: artificial intelligence; metacognition; self-regulated learning; higher education; AI literacyAbstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the way metacognitive skills like planning, monitoring, evaluating and regulating one’s own learning are developed in higher education. This narrative review synthesizes literature published from 2021 to 2026 on AI-supported metacognitive learning, drawing on intelligent tutoring systems, generative AI chatbots, learning analytics dashboards, open learner models, and AI literacy frameworks. grounded in (Flavell, 1979) theory of metacognition and (Winne, Philip H. & Hadwin, Allyson F, 1998; Zimmerman, 1990) models of self-regulated learning (SRL), the review discusses how pedagogical agents, adaptive scaffolds and generative prompts can externalize and support the planning, monitoring, and evaluation phases of the SRL cycle. Research indicates that the use of well-structured AI scaffolds like metacognitive prompts, negotiable open learner models, and reflective dashboards is associated with improved self-regulation, motivation, and academic achievement. But there are also large and growing bodies of research documenting risks of “cognitive offloading” and “metacognitive laziness,” in which uncritical reliance on generative AI narrows learners’ engagement with the reasoning process itself. Moreover, the review delves into the situation of pre-service teachers, where AI literacy and metacognitive competence intersect with professional identity formation and the broader Education 4.0 skills agenda. The discussion reveals unresolved tensions between AI as a cognitive amplifier and AI as a cognitive substitute, and identifies gaps in long-term, discipline-specific, and culturally situated evidence, especially from South Asian higher education contexts. The review concludes that it is not the technology but the pedagogical design of AI tools that determines whether AI acts as a metacognitive scaffold or a metacognitive shortcut.
Downloads
References
[1] H. Crompton and D. Burke, “Artificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the field,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 20, no. 1, p. 22, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8.
[2] J. H. Flavell, “Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry.,” Am. Psychol., vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 906–911, Oct. 1979, doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906.
[3] P. R. Pintrich, “The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessing,” Theory Pract., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 219–225, Nov. 2002, doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3.
[4] B. J. Zimmerman, “Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview,” Educ. Psychol., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 3–17, Jan. 1990, doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2.
[5] Y. Fan et al., “Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 489–530, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.1111/bjet.13544.
[6] M. Gerlich, “AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking,” Societies, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 6, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.3390/soc15010006.
[7] R. Azevedo et al., “Lessons Learned and Future Directions of MetaTutor: Leveraging Multichannel Data to Scaffold Self-Regulated Learning With an Intelligent Tutoring System,” Front. Psychol., vol. 13, p. 813632, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.813632.
[8] D. A. Dever, N. A. Sonnenfeld, M. D. Wiedbusch, S. G. Schmorrow, M. J. Amon, and R. Azevedo, “A complex systems approach to analyzing pedagogical agents’ scaffolding of self-regulated learning within an intelligent tutoring system,” Metacognition Learn., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 659–691, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11409-023-09346-x.
[9] G. Schraw and D. Moshman, “Metacognitive theories,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 351–371, Dec. 1995, doi: 10.1007/BF02212307.
[10] Winne, Philip H. and Hadwin, Allyson F, “Studying as Self-Regulated Learning,” in Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice, Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., and Graesser, A. C., Eds., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998, pp. 277–304.
[11] L. Tankelevitch et al., “The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI,” 2023, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2312.10893.
[12] J. Iqbal, Z. F. Hashmi, M. Z. Asghar, and M. N. Abid, “Generative AI tool use enhances academic achievement in sustainable education through shared metacognition and cognitive offloading among preservice teachers,” Sci. Rep., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 16610, May 2025, doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-01676-x.
[13] M. Tsakeni, S. C. Nwafor, M. Mosia, and F. O. Egara, “Mapping the Scaffolding of Metacognition and Learning by AI Tools in STEM Classrooms: A Bibliometric–Systematic Review Approach (2005–2025),” J. Intell., vol. 13, no. 11, p. 148, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.3390/jintelligence13110148.
[14] M. J. Grant and A. Booth, “A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies,” Health Inf. Libr. J., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 91–108, Jun. 2009, doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.
[15] D. A. Dever, M. D. Wiedbusch, S. M. Romero, and R. Azevedo, “Investigating pedagogical agents’ scaffolding of self‐regulated learning in relation to learners’ subgoals,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 1290–1308, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1111/bjet.13432.
[16] F. Wang, X. Zhou, K. Li, A. C. K. Cheung, and M. Tian, “The effects of artificial intelligence-based interactive scaffolding on secondary students’ speaking performance, goal setting, self-evaluation, and motivation in informal digital learning of English,” Interact. Learn. Environ., vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 4633–4652, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2025.2470319.
[17] D. T. K. Ng, C. W. Tan, and J. K. L. Leung, “Empowering student self‐regulated learning and science education through ChatGPT: A pioneering pilot study,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 1328–1353, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1111/bjet.13454.
[18] X. Xu, L. Qiao, N. Cheng, H. Liu, and W. Zhao, “Enhancing self‐regulated learning and learning experience in generative AI environments: The critical role of metacognitive support,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 1842–1863, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.1111/bjet.13599.
[19] L. Sun and L. Zhou, “Does Generative Artificial Intelligence Improve the Academic Achievement of College Students? A Meta-Analysis,” J. Educ. Comput. Res., vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 1676–1713, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1177/07356331241277937.
[20] D. T. K. Ng, J. K. L. Leung, S. K. W. Chu, and M. S. Qiao, “Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review,” Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell., vol. 2, p. 100041, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041.
[21] D. T. K. Ng, W. Wu, J. K. L. Leung, T. K. F. Chiu, and S. K. W. Chu, “Design and validation of the AI literacy questionnaire: The affective, behavioural, cognitive and ethical approach,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 1082–1104, May 2024, doi: 10.1111/bjet.13411.
[22] O. Almatrafi, A. Johri, and H. Lee, “A systematic review of AI literacy conceptualization, constructs, and implementation and assessment efforts (2019–2023),” Comput. Educ. Open, vol. 6, p. 100173, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100173.
[23] S.-C. Kong, M.-Y. W. Cheung, and O. Tsang, “Developing an artificial intelligence literacy framework: Evaluation of a literacy course for senior secondary students using a project-based learning approach,” Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell., vol. 6, p. 100214, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100214.
[24] I. Jivet, M. Scheffel, M. Specht, and H. Drachsler, “License to evaluate: preparing learning analytics dashboards for educational practice,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, Sydney New South Wales Australia: ACM, Mar. 2018, pp. 31–40. doi: 10.1145/3170358.3170421.
[25] H. Bae, J. Hur, J. Park, G. W. Choi, and J. Moon, “Pre-service Teachers’ Dual Perspectives on Generative AI: Benefits, Challenges, and Integrating into Teaching and Learning,” Online Learn., vol. 28, no. 3, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.24059/olj.v28i3.4543.
[26] M. Nyaaba et al., “Generative AI as a Learning Buddy and Teaching Assistant: Pre-service Teachers’ Uses and Attitudes,” 2024, arXiv. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2407.11983.
[27] H.-P. (Hank) Lee et al., “The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers,” in Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Yokohama Japan: ACM, Apr. 2025, pp. 1–22. doi: 10.1145/3706598.3713778.
[28] K. Bittle and O. El-Gayar, “Generative AI and Academic Integrity in Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda,” Information, vol. 16, no. 4, p. 296, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.3390/info16040296.
[29] I. M. García-López and L. Trujillo-Liñán, “Ethical and regulatory challenges of Generative AI in education: a systematic review,” Front. Educ., vol. 10, p. 1565938, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1565938.
[30] N. J. Francis, S. Jones, and D. P. Smith, “Generative AI in Higher Education: Balancing Innovation and Integrity,” Br. J. Biomed. Sci., vol. 81, p. 14048, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048.
[31] C. Merino-Campos, “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Personalized Learning in Higher Education: A Systematic Review,” Trends High. Educ., vol. 4, no. 2, p. 17, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.3390/higheredu4020017. [32] J. K. Pandey and R. Kumar, “Governing the algorithmic agent: Confronting overt and covert challenges to justice and the future of work,” Int. J. Law Manag. Humanit., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1974–1984, 2025, doi: 10.10000/IJLMH.1110648.
[33] S. K. Maurya and J. K. Pandey, “Developmental assessment alternatives in business education,” in Reimagining Business Education in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, K. Mili, Ed., Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2026, pp. 271–316, doi: 10.4018/979-8-3373-4377-8.ch009.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
This study is based on published literature. No original datasets were generated or analyzed; therefore, data sharing is not applicable.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Interdisciplinary Learning and Knowledge Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0): anyone may copy, redistribute, remix, transform, and build upon the material in any medium or format for any purpose, including commercially, provided appropriate credit is given to the original authors and a link to the licence is provided.
