Research School Network: Talking, Thinking, Improving: Using Peer Feedback to Develop Metacognition Explore how structured peer feedback and purposeful pupil talk can develop metacognition and reflective learning.

Talk can be a powerful tool in any learning, so why not use talk to develop metacognition? Recommendation four of the EEF’s Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning Guidance Report (2025) advocates developing metacognitive talk in the classroom by giving pupils opportunities to articulate their own learning. Vygotsky (1978) argued that learning occurs first through interactions with significant others, and that skills are developed socially before becoming cognitive processes. As metacognition is a mental skill, could this be developed more effectively through peer interactions? With this in mind, I became interested in how pupil-to-pupil talk can strengthen knowledge and understanding of metacognitive strategies and self-regulation. As such, I decided to design peer feedback tasks in response to extended writing pieces at Key Stage 5.

Banister (2020) explored the use of meta-dialogues in peer feedback. He noted that meta-dialogues did strengthen metacognition, however peer feedback was only effective when learners knew how to give feedback constructively, using sentence stems to improve the quality of the dialogue. This approach also aligns with Recommendation four of the EEF’s Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning Guidance Report (2025), which implies that talk can help pupils to plan, monitor and evaluate their learning, particularly when it is deliberately modelled and scaffolded. The use of linguistic scaffolds during verbal feedback between peers can benefit all students by reducing hidden expectations, promoting disciplinary literacy, and increasing confidence in learners to participate. One worthy point raised however, is the use of ground rules during peer feedback to safeguard learners emotionally and promote a culture of honesty. Learners should be encouraged to challenge ​‘ideas’ not people.

One strategy to promote metacognition in peer feedback devised by Reinholz et al (2016) is Peer Assisted Reflection (PAR). Devised for assessing homework, PAR is used in solving open ended Physics problems. The strategy involves receiving peer feedback, reflecting on the feedback and revising the task. However, whilst peer feedback can be useful, it can also be superficial and the EEF’s Teaching and Learning Toolkit on Collaborative Learning Approaches urges practitioners to remain cautious about collaborative learning that is not well structured. It encourages designing collaborative tasks carefully and using scaffolds and questioning frameworks to ensure that peer interaction serves a purpose. This is echoed by the EEF Guidance Report entitled Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning (2021) which suggests that peer feedback can be very effective, particularly if is carefully planned and provides opportunities for students to act upon it. The need for it to be actionable highlights the value of scaffolding, a strategy that has been carefully considered and embedded into the Assessment and Feedback Policy at Etone college. The policy is designed to ensure that quality peer feedback is not about the amount of dialogue produced but rather the quality of thought, reflection and self improvement that it leads to. If pupils are going to use peer feedback effectively, it needs to be well-structured to promote metacognitive thinking.

Reflecting on the PAR approach, I devised a strategy that could be used during peer feedback to foster self-regulation; Praise, Ask, Refine. Students review their peer’s work, praise by offering a strength, ask a clarifying question to promote reflection and suggest an area for refinement. Each step is accompanied by suggested sentence starters to scaffold their feedback (see the mat below). Students adhered to a set of ground rules to promote objectivity. These included referring to the work rather than the person, being polite but constructive and explaining reasoning by linking to specific details of the task, success criteria or mark scheme to keep it focused on learning. By promoting scaffolded verbal feedback over written peer feedback, students were offering more detailed assessments of each other using academic and formal language. Students seemed receptive to feedback in this format and acted on it effectively to adapt their work.

Whilst the approaches above present a detailed structure for linking talk to metacognition, there are a few easy wins that can embedded over time. One strategy is the use of a ​‘pit-stop point.’ This is an opportunity for students to pause at intervals throughout an independent task. As suggested in recommendation four of the EEF’s Metacognition and Self-regulated Learning Guidance Report (2025), a quick pause is useful for students to literally ​‘check in’ and monitor their performance. Peer talk could be utilised here by encouraging students to question each other. ​‘What made you think that?’ ​‘Why have you chosen that?’ ​‘How is it working for you?’

Similarly, a quick confidence rating can be just enough to encourage students to reflect on what they are stuck on and why. Asking students to give a numerical rating as an indication of how sure they are during a task, promotes the self-monitoring element noted in recommendations two and five of the EEF’s Metacognition and Self-regulated Learning Guidance Report (2025). They must, however, follow this up by using talk to provide a detailed justification, or explain how they will make adjustments to their approach to the task. Lastly, one of the most useful pieces of classroom technology is the use of a visualiser. This can be used to model metacognition by projecting examples of work and encouraging students to articulate their thinking as they completed the task.

• Talk in peer feedback can make metacognition visible by encouraging learners to explain their thinking.
• Structure, scaffolds and ground rules allow for verbal peer feedback to move from superficial to meaningful, promoting self-regulation and reflection.
• More peer dialogue doesn’t mean it is high quality. Avoid being fooled by extensive talk. Peer talk should purposefully monitor, evaluate and challenge ideas not people.

Banister, C. (2023). Exploring peer feedback processes and peer feedback meta-dialogues with learners of academic and business English. Language Teaching Research, 27(3), 746 – 764.

Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) (2025) Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning. London: Education Endowment Foundation. Available at: Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning – Guidance report | Education Endowment Foundation

Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) (2025) Teaching and Learning Toolkit: Collaborative Learning Approaches. London: Education Endowment Foundation. Available at: Collaborative learning approaches | EEF

Education Endowment Foundation (2021) Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning. London: Education Endowment Foundation. Available at: Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning | EEF

Reinholz, D et al (2016). Using Peer Feedback to Promote Reflection on Open Ended Problems. The Physics Teacher, 54(6), 364 – 368.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.