Metacognition is thinking about the contents and processes of one’s own cognition. Research shows that metacognition plays important roles in most cognitive tasks, from everyday behaviors to problem-solving to expert performance. This chapter focuses on metacognition’s centrality in learning and in self-regulated learning. When learning, people monitor what they know and whether it is aligned with their intended learning outcome. A learner’s ability to monitor effectively is known as calibration. Learners then control their next actions based on their monitoring, and finally they self-regulate the process of monitoring and controlling their learning by shaping and adapting cognition or behavior by reaching forward by planning for future tasks. Research shows that people learn better when they have strong metacognitive abilities and when they can self-regulate their learning effectively.

Cognitive and metacognitive strategies are key to successful learning with multimedia; however, research shows that learners rarely use these strategies effectively and consequently fail to develop a deep understanding of complex topics and domains. Dynamically and accurately monitoring and regulating one’s own cognitive and metacognitive strategies is necessary to be a successful learner but demands an enormous amount of effort. In this chapter, we (1) define metacognitive strategies during multimedia learning; (2) review recent empirical literature on metacognitive strategies during multimedia learning; (3) present a new model of multimedia learning ; (4) provide recommendations for augmenting contemporary cognitive theories of multimedia learning to account for metacognition; (5) propose empirically-based principles for designing multimedia environments aimed at fostering metacognitive strategies; and finally (6) highlight directions for future research.

The allure of personal epistemology research is the implicit assumption that in some cases students’ poor academic performance may not be due to any deficiency in skill or ability, but rather due to their naïve beliefs about knowledge and knowing (Hofer and Pintrich, 1997). Numerous researchers have asserted that naïve or less sophisticated beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing may cause students to memorize facts rather than construct conceptual knowledge, poorly monitor and regulate their learning, exert little effort, and neglect essential thinking skills (Hofer, 2002, 2004a, 2004 b). These students act as mere receivers of information (Belenky et al., 1986) and not active constructors of knowledge who appropriately question authority figures or other sources of knowledge (Baxter Magolda, 2004; King and Kitchener, 1994; Perry, 1970). However, according to personal epistemology researchers, if these students could be shown that knowledge is complex and dynamic, they would see the need for critical thinking skills to evaluate the justifications for knowledge claims and be able to construct complex and coherent knowledge whose warrants could be both appropriately scrutinized when necessary and utilized in a convincing manner on tests, papers, and other academic assignments (Kuhn and Weinstock, 2002). Such sophistication is often described as a prerequisite for success in higher education (Boyer, 1987; Sullivan and Rosin, 2008). Yet, the research on personal epistemology is not clear whether elementary or secondary school students are likely to have or need such sophisticated beliefs regarding the nature of knowledge and knowing.