Unlocking the power of metacognition in mathematically gifted minds

Abstract

The aim of this study is to critically examine the importance of metacognitive skills in the problem-solving processes of mathematically gifted students and to evaluate the relevant literature. The study explores how these students utilize skills such as planning, monitoring, and evaluation, as well as the relationship of these skills to academic achievement and their contribution to the learning process. Furthermore, these competencies are considered from cognitive, psychological, and pedagogical perspectives. Research has shown that mathematically gifted students are able to use metacognitive processes such as planning, monitoring, and evaluation more effectively and flexibly. These students not only reach correct solutions but also demonstrate a high level of awareness regarding the problem-solving process, enabling them to restructure their strategies when necessary. Therefore, mathematically gifted students distinguish themselves from their peers not only through their numerical abilities but also through their advanced metacognitive capacities. However, it has also been noted that heightened metacognitive awareness may occasionally lead to challenges such as over-analysis, perfectionism, or emotional sensitivity. Hence, in supporting gifted students, it is essential to consider their emotional and psychological development alongside their cognitive growth. In conclusion, for mathematically gifted students to fully realize their potential, it is essential to support not only their high-level cognitive abilities but also their metacognitive strategies in a holistic manner. Such support not only enhances academic achievement but also strengthens long-term learning habits, self-efficacy, and motivation for problem-solving. Structuring educational environments in ways that encourage the development of these skills will contribute to the formation of more productive and well-balanced individuals within this student group.

Keywords

• metacognition
• mathematical giftedness
• problem solving

References

1. Alexander, J. M., Carr, M., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: directions for future research. Developmental Review, 15, 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1995.1001
2. Assmus, D., & Fritzlar, T. (2022). Mathematical creativity and mathematical giftedness in primary school age-An interview study on creating figural patterns. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 54, 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01328-8
3. Barfurth, M. A., Ritchie, K. C., Irving, J. A., & Shore, B. M. (2009). A metacognitive portrait of gifted learners. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), The international handbook on giftedness (pp. 397-417). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1- 4020-6162-2
4. Boran, M., & Karakuş, F. (2022). The mediator role of critical thinking disposition in the relationship between perceived problem-solving skills and metacognitive awareness of gifted and talented students. Participatory Educational Research, 9(1), 61-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.17275/per.22.4.9.1
5. Bryce, D., & Whitebread, D. (2012). The development of metacognitive skills: Evidence from observational analysis of young children’s behavior during problem-solving. Metacognition and Learning, 7(3), 197–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-012-9091-2
6. Chen, S., & McDunn, B. A. (2022). Metacognition: History, measurements, and the role in early childhood development and education. Learning and Motivation, 78, 101786. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.lmot.2022.101786
7. Cheng, P. W. (1993). Metacognition and giftedness: The state of the relationship. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37(3), 105–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629303700302
8. Desoete, A., Baten, E., Vercaemst, V., De Busschere, A., Baudonck, M., & Vanhaeke, J. (2019). Metacognition and motivation as predictors for mathematics performance of Belgian elementary school children. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 51(4), 667–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-01020-w

9. Desoete, A., & De Craene, B. (2019). Metacognition and mathematics education: An overview. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 51(4), 565–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01060-w
10. Desoete, A., & Roeyers, H. (2006). Metacognitive macroevaluations in mathematical problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 16(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.12.003.
11. Dover, A., & Shore, B. M. (1991). Giftedness and flexibility on a mathematical set breaking task. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35(2), 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629103500209
12. Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: What can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process? Educational Research Review, 1, 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2005.11.001
13. Erdoğan, F., & Gül, N. (2023). Gifted Students’ repeating patterning skills and cognitive demand levels. Kocaeli University Journal of Education, 6(1), 70-95. http://doi.org/10.33400/kuje.1221801
14. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066 X.34.10.906
15. Fu, Y., & Qi, C. (2025). The relationship between metacognitive skills and mathematics achievement of Chinese eighth-grade students. Current Psychology, 44, 3845-3856. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-07216-6
16. Geng, X., & Su, Y. S. (2025). The effects of different metacognitive patterns on students’ self-regulated learning in blended learning. Computers & Education, 227, 105211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105211
17. Hammod, H. S., & Paz-Baruch, N. (2024). Self-regulated learning while solving mathematical problems among mathematically gifted and talented students. High Ability Studies, 35(2), 201–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2024.2374715
18. He, G., Lin, H., & Su, A. (2024). Longitudinal and reciprocal links between metacognition, mathematical modeling competencies, and mathematics achievement in grades 7–8: A cross-lagged panel analysis. Metacognition and Learning, 19, 967-005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09397-8
19. Keleş, T., & Yazgan, Y. (2022). Indicators of gifted students’ strategic flexibility in non- routine problem solving. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(10), 2797–2818. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2022.2105760
20. Knox, H. (2017). Using writing strategies in math to ıncrease metacognitive skills for the gifted learner. Gifted Child Today, 40(1), 43-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217516675904
21. Kontostavlou, E. Z., & Drigas, A. (2021). How metacognition supports giftedness in leadership: A review of contemporary literature. International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning, 14(2), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijac.v14i2.23237
22. Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school children. University of Chicago Press.
23. Leikin R. (2018). Giftedness and high ability in mathematics. S. Lerman (Ed.) içinde, Encyclopedia of mathematics education (ss. 315-325). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_65
24. Leikin, R. (2021). When practice needs more research: The nature and nurture of mathematical giftedness. ZDM- Mathematics Education, 53, 1579–1589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01276-9
25. Marulis, L. M. (2025). Editorial: Advances in metacognition and reflection. Frontiers in Developmental Psychology, 3, 1579553. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdpys.2025.1579553
26. Moustakas, D., & Gonida, E. (2023). Motivational profiles of high achievers in mathematics: relations with metacognitive processes and achievement emotions. Education Sciences, 13(10), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100970
27. Muncer, G., Higham, P. A., Gosling, C. J., Cortese, S., Wood-Downie, H., & Hadwin, J. A. (2022). A meta-analysis investigating the association between metacognition and math performance in adolescence. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 301–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09620-x
28. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition. In J. Metcalfe, & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). The MIT Press.
29. Nolte M., & Pamperien K. (2017). Challenging problems in a regular classroom setting and in a special foster programme. ZDM Mathematics Education, 49, 121-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0825-5
30. Oppong, E., Shore, B. M., & Muis, K. R. (2019). Clarifying the connections among giftedness, metacognition, self- regulation, and self-regulated learning: Implications for theory and practice. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(2), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986218814008
31. Özsoy, G. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between meta¬cognition and mathematics achievement. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12, 227–235. https://doi.org/10.10 07/s12564-010-9129-6
32. Öztürk, M., Akkan, Y., & Kaplan, A. (2018). The metacognitive skills performed by 6th-8th grade gifted students during the problem-solving process: Gümüşhane sample. Ege Journal of Education, 19(2), 446-469. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.316662
33. Paz-Baruch, N., Leikin, M., & Leikin, R. (2022). Not any gifted is an expert in mathematics and not any expert in mathematics is gifted. Gifted and Talented International, 37(1), 25-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2021.2010244
34. Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2017). What have we learned about giftedness and creativity? An overview of a five years journey. In Leikin, R., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness. advances in mathematics education (pp. 201-223). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38840-3_13
35. Renzulli, J. S. (2003). Conception of giftedness and ıts relationship to the development of social capital. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 75-87). Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
36. Renzulli, J. S. (2005). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 246-275). Cambridge University Press.
37. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Making sense of “out loud” problem solving protocols. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 4, 171–191.
38. Schraw, G. (1997). Helping gifted students develop metacognitive awareness. Roeper Review, 20(1), 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199709553842
39. Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36(1–2), 111–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
40. Schraw, G. & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371.
41. Sheppard, S., & Kanevsky, L. S. (1998). Nurturing gifted students’ metacognitive awareness: Effects of training in homogeneous and heterogeneous classes. Roeper Review, 21(4), 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199909553974
42. Smedsrud, J. H., Nordahl-Hansen, A., & Idsøe, E. (2022). Mathematically gifted students’ experience with their teachers’ mathematical competence and boredom in school: a qualitative interview study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 876350. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.876350
43. Sternberg, R. J., Chowkase, A., Desmet, O., Karami, S., Landy, J., & Lu, J. (2021). Beyond transformational giftedness. Education Sciences, 11(5), 192. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050192
44. Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. Cambridge University Press.
45. Snyder, K. E., Nietfeld, J. L., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2011). Giftedness and metacognition: A short-term longitudinal investigation of metacognitive monitoring in the classroom. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(3), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986211412769
46. Swanson, H. L. (1992). The relationship between metacognition and problem solving in gifted children. Roeper Review, 15(1), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199209553457
47. Tay, L. Y., Chan, M., Chong, S. K., Tan, J. Y., & Aiyoob, T. B. (2024). Learning of mathematics: A metacognitive experiences perspective. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22(3), 561–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10385-8
48. Temur, Ö. D., Özsoy, G., & Turgut, S. (2019). Metacognitive instructional behaviours of preschool teachers in mathematical activities. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 51(4), 655–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019- 01069-1
49. Tibken, C., Richter, T., von der Linden, N., Schmiedeler, S., & Schneider, W. (2022). The role of metacognitive competences in the development of school achievement among gifted adolescents. Child Development, 93, 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13640
50. Toikka, S., Eronen, L., Atjonen, P., & Havu-Nuutinen, S. (2024). Combined conceptualisations of metacognitive knowledge to understand students’ mathematical problem-solving. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2357901. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2357901
51. Tortop, H. S. (2015). A comparison of gifted and non-gifted students’ self-regulation skills for science learning. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 3(1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.17478/JEGYS.2015112017
52. Turgut, S., & Uğurlu, M. (2024). A moderated mediation analysis on the relationship between metacognition and mathematical resilience of gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 61(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23141
53. Urban, K., & Urban, M. (2023). How can we measure metacognition in creative problem-solving? Standardization of the MCPS scale. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101345
54. Veenman, M. V., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006- 6893-0
55. Veenman, M. V. J., & van Cleef, D. (2019). Measuring metacognitive skills for mathematics: Students’ selfreports versus on-line assessment methods. Mathematics Education, 51(4), 691–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018- 1006-5
56. Verschaffel, L. (2024). Strategy flexibility in mathematics. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 56(1), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01491-6
57. Wilson, D., & Conyers, M. (2016). Teaching students to drive their brains: Metacognitive strategies, activities, and lesson ideas. ASCD.
58. Xie, Y., Zeng, F., & Yang, Y. (2024). A meta-analysis of the relationship between metacognition and academic achievement in mathematics: From preschool to university. Acta Psychologica, 249, 104486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104486
59. Yazgan-Sag, G., & Argun, Z. (2024). Self-control and self-monitoring behaviour of gifted learners in the mathematical problem-solving process: A case study. South African Journal of Education, 44(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v44n1a2279
60. Yazgı-Yanık, Z., & Afat, N. (2022). Metacognitive awareness as a predictor of social emotional learning skills in gifted and talented students. Gifted and Talented International, 37(2), 109-118, https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2022.2053316
61. Young, A. E., & Worrell, F. C. (2018). Comparing metacognition assessments of mathematics in academically talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(3), 259–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986218755915
62. Ziegler, A. (2005). The actiotope model of giftedness. In R. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 411–434). Cambridge University Press.
63. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self‐regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self‐regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press.
64. Zohar, A. (2012). Explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge: Definitions, students’ learning, and teachers’ professional development. In A. Zohar, & Y. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science education (pp. 197–223). Springer.