The research deals with how higher-order thinking of education students, expressed in reflective writing and metacognition, promotes professional insights as part of a social-emotional learning process. The findings reveal significant personal and professional insights among the students, which may serve as a bridge to intellectual development that manifests in social, emotional, and cognitive development.

 social-emotional learning (SEL)

General skills of social-emotional learning are reflected in this study in three central dimensions of generic skills and abilities: (1) cognitive self-regulation, for example, control of attention, work planning, and cognitive flexibility (2) emotional processes, for example; Emotional awareness, emotional expression, behavior regulation, empathy (3) Cultivating social skills while understanding social cues, conflict resolution, pro-social behavior (Jones and Bouffard, 2012).  

Social-emotional learning is reflected in learning emotional and social skills and concepts used by the students in contexts and social situations during the courses. This is reflected in the emotional aspect, including, for example, empathy, teamwork, informed decision-making, regulation, perseverance, and dealing with failure. Studies (Jones et al., 2019; Blyth et al., 2018; Jones & Kahn, 2017) that examined social and emotional development demonstrated that they are intertwined and affect academic achievement, physical and mental health, and civic engagement. Moreover, it has been proven that cultivating social and emotional abilities in learners can predict an improvement in academic achievements, reduce situations, deal with crises, accelerate social leadership, and influence learning applications and their mental and emotional fitness. Thus, social-emotional learning has received much attention in the last decade and includes many concepts and organizing theories of these skills and competencies (Sperling, 2018).

 higher order thinking

High thinking allows learners to be aware of their learning process and control their decisions while paying attention to the entire learning process. This process requires different decisions during learning and provides tools to deal with difficulties while thinking about successful and varied solutions whose contribution to the quality of education is significant (Ben-David and Orion, 2013; Zohar and Barzilai, 2015; Perry, Landy, and Golder, 2019).

The research literature uses the terms reflection, metacognition, and self-directed learning interchangeably, although there are theoretical differences between them (Veenman, 2011). Metacognition researchers tend to believe that self-directedness is a corresponding component of metacognition. In contrast, researchers refer to self-direction as a concept containing metacognition alongside concepts such as motivation and emotional regulation (Veenman et al., 2006). Many studies have indicated that learners who did higher thinking processes, such as reflective and metacognitive processes, discussed more self-examination activities and demonstrated a deeper understanding of the study material compared to groups that did not learn strategies advocating this type. of thinking (Kaberman & Dori, 2009; Zohar, & Barzilai, 2015).

The reflective and metacognitive process may influence and shape the hidden pedagogical beliefs and concepts directly affecting teaching. To achieve this, it is essential to include in the practical experience during training elements of building complex educational processes: beliefs and attitudes about teaching and its components (Osterman & Kottkamp, 2004; Korthagen, 2004). Zohar and Barzilai (2015) point out that the skills required to implement this type of thinking are (1) planning - setting goals, choosing an appropriate strategy, (2) monitoring - awareness and examination of the thinking processes during learning, and (3) evaluating the thinking. And learning processes, which are carried out at the end of the work process through reflection and self-evaluation, may lead to operative recommendations regarding learning.

The research population includes 48 students aged 25-34, socially diverse and studying at a large college in Israel. The students participated in two courses for a bachelor's degree in education: some in the course 'Language assessment processes in the upper elementary school' and others in the class 'Discourse investigation.' research process The study is based on data collected after the researchers published the course grades and after the participants agreed to use the reflective processes they wrote during the courses for research purposes. One of the researchers taught a seminar on discourse research. The second researcher taught the Department of Hebrew a disciplinary course on language skills assessment. In both courses, the students were asked, as part of the course assignments, to do a reflective and meta-cognitive process in which they shared their thinking, insights, and professional self-formation. Each researcher collected and analyzed the records while identifying key themes and finding connections between them. Processing was based on content analysis focusing on what the students said in words, and descriptions, rather than how they presented their words (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In the analysis phase, each researcher reads all the interview transcripts to determine which category the segment belongs to according to the research objectives. In the second step, the matching of the elements to the categories was selected. The reliability test was based on "reliability between judges." In individual cases where differences of opinion were discovered, a discussion was held until an agreement was reached. The reliability between the judges is 84%. The study is a qualitative study based on the researcher's ability to internalize the complexity of the learned learning experience and the context. A researcher is an interpretive tool for reality. His interpretations are derived from the various contexts in which the research participants operate and reveal the meanings, interpretations, and subtleties given to the fact. Reality is influenced by personal and personality and social, verbal, and cultural structures (Guba & Lincoln, 2008). The role of the researcher is to investigate the phenomena, find meaning and interpret the phenomena, thus allowing to learn in-depth about the process being studied (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000). The interpretive-qualitative aspect helps researchers explore the students' experiences being studied.

Reflection and metacognition are considered high-thinking skills. They allowed the students in the courses to stop, think and conduct an intra-personal dialogue about topics that came up, choose between alternatives, and decide which system of beliefs, perceptions, and ideas suits them. The research findings revealed personal and professional insights. The personal insights were essential for increasing the components of social-emotional learning: emotional awareness, self-management, and the students' collaborative learning skills. The writing, the description of the events, and the need to conceptualize the feelings and perceptions encouraged the students to rethink the experiences, interpret them and examine their consequences. The students examined the feelings, perceptions, actions, and decisions and drew lessons they can apply as teachers in diverse teaching contexts in the educational field. Examining the professional insights shows that the students cultivated abilities to respond to differences in the classroom, self-manage, integrate principles of social-personal learning, and interact with colleagues in the teachers' room. The higher-order thinking emphasized the importance of providing a differential response in the classroom and adapting the learning framework, teaching methods, and assessment to the diverse students - these increase motivation, ignite curiosity and interest, sharpen academic skills, and encourage choice and exploration. A high order of thinking deepened the understanding of the study material, which includes three central dimensions of social-emotional skills and abilities: cognitive self-regulation, emotional awareness, regulating behavior, and evaluating the diversity in the group. The introspection strengthened the concept that the students as teachers in the future have the responsibility to also incorporate principles of social-emotional learning in their classrooms, to serve as a source of support, to be present, to reassure, to allow autonomy, to maintain a routine and to provide a sense of partnership.

Ben-David, A., & Orion, N. (2013). Teachers’ Voices on Integrating Metacognition. Science Education. International Journal of Science Education, 35(18), 3161–3193. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.697208 Blyth, D. A., Jones, S., & Borowski, T. (2018). SEL frameworks–What are they, and why are they important? Measuring SEL, Using Data to Inspire Practice, 1(2), 1-9. ‏ Bransford, J., Darling-Hammond, L. & LaPage, P. (2005). Introduction. In: L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358- 389). Jossey-Bass. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. ‏ Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 1–43). Sage Publications, Inc. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (eds.), The Landscape of Qualitative Research (pp. 195-220). Publications. Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). Metacognition in chemical education: Question posing in the case-based computerized learning environment. Instructional Science, 37, 403–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9054-9 Korthagen, F. A. J. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: Towards a more holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77-97. Jones, S., Farrington, C.A., Jagers, R., Brackett, M., & Kahn, J. (2019). Social, emotional, and academic development: A research agenda for the next generation. National Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development. Osterman, K. F., & Kottkamp, R. B. (2004). Reflective practice for educators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Perry, J., Lundie, D., & Golder, G. (2019). Metacognition in schools: what does the literature suggest about the effectiveness of teaching metacognition in schools? Educational Review, 71(4), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1441127 Veenman, M. V. J. (2011). Learning to self-monitor and self-regulate. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Ed.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 197–218). Routledge. Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & 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 Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2015). Metacognition and teaching higher-order thinking (HOT) in science education: Students’ learning, teachers’ knowledge, and instructional practices. In R. Wegerif, Li, Li & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Routledge International handbook of research on teaching thinking (pp. 229–242). Routledge.