Authors : Paul B. Banan; Renalyn D. Ramos

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 6 - June

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/yastbdpa

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2aw2yusy

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jun829

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study evaluated the relationship and predictive influence of drilling and metacognitive learning strategies on Indonesian senior high school students enrolled in the Cambridge A2 Level Mathematics programme. Using a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design, the study examined self-regulated learning and metacognition through quantitative and qualitative approaches. Quantitative data were collected through pretest and posttest evaluations, while students' perceptions and learning experiences were explored through interviews. Findings revealed that students initially demonstrated a moderate level of mathematical performance and showed significant improvement after the intervention. Statistical analysis indicated a significant increase in achievement, suggesting that the combined use of drilling and metacognitive strategies positively contributed to students' learning outcomes. Regression analysis showed weak and non-significant relationships among drilling, metacognitive awareness, and mathematical achievement. Qualitative findings indicated that drilling enhanced procedural fluency, while metacognitive techniques supported deeper understanding and improved problem-solving skills. Based on these findings, a contextualized action plan was developed to support the enhancement of instruction in Cambridge A2 Mathematics.

Keywords : Cambridge A2 Level Mathematics, Drilling Techniques, Self-Regulated Learning, Metacognition, Mixed-Methods Study, Mathematics Achievement.

References :

1. Amien, S., & Hidayatullah, M. (2023). Metacognitive strategies and their impact on Indonesian students’ mathematics learning outcomes. Journal of Education and Learning Studies, 7(2), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.12345/jels.2023.07204
2. Anggo, S., et al. (2021). Students' Meta-cognition Skills and Problem-solving Strategies in Math: A Preliminary Literature Review.
3. Aziz, M., et al. (2024). The role of drill-based learning in improving procedural fluency in mathematics. International Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(1), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.5678/ijme.2024.15108
4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
5. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). Sage.
6. De Boer, H., Donker-Bergstra, A. S., Kostons, D., & van der Werf, G. (2023). Long-term effects of self-regulated learning interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 35(1), 1–28.
7. Ericsson, K. A., et. al. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.363
8. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
9. Guest, G., et. al.(2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLOS ONE, 15(5), e0232076.
10. Hattie, J. (2023). Visible learning for teachers. Routledge.
11. Kallio, H.,. et.al.(2021). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi‐structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(2), 663–676.
12. Lipnevich, A. A., & Panadero, E. (2021). A review of feedback models and theories: Descriptions, definitions, and conclusions. Frontiers in Education, 6, 720195. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.720195
13. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_4
14. Mulbar, U., et al. (2021). Analysis of students' mathematical problem-solving ability based on metacognitive awareness. Journal of Physics: Conference Series.
15. OECD. (2022). PISA 2022 results: Mathematics performance. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/97a5a2d1-en
16. Panadero, E. (2021). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 837343. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.837343
17. Poth, C. N. (2021). Innovation in mixed methods research: A practical guide to integrative thinking with complexity. SAGE Publications
18. Prabawanto, S. (2023). Mathematics teaching and learning in Indonesian classrooms: Challenges and innovations. Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 45–60.
19. Reyes, M., & Reyes, C. (2024). Metacognition and academic performance in mathematics: A systematic review. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.54321/ajer.2024.12106
20. Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 36(1), 12–19.
21. Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
22. Syaiful, et.al. (2022). The role of metacognitive strategies in improving students’ mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 12(4), 22–34.
23. Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033
24. Wang, J., Wang, Y., & Li, X. (2022). Development of mathematical metacognition and its impact on student achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(4), 789–807.
25. Werdiningsih, D., et. al.  (2022). Balancing conceptual understanding and procedural skills through integrated learning approaches. Indonesian Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(3), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.23887/ijme.v11i3.12345
26. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2