The aim of this study was to assess the impact of implementing the metacognitive learning strategy within the context of socioscientific issues (SSI) on students' scientific argumentation skills. The metacognitive learning strategy used comprised four stages, namely preparing, doing, checking, and assessing & following-up, abbreviated as MLS-PDCA. In addition, a quasi-experiment was used with a pretest-posttest control group design. The participants included 96 students in the 11th grade MIPA (mathematics and sciences) program at public high schools in Malang, Indonesia. In the study process, one experimental class was instructed using the metacognitive learning strategy within the context of socioscientific issues (MLS-PDCA SSI), while two control classes received instruction through metacognitive learning strategy (MLS-PDCA) and expository learning strategy (ELS). The argumentation skills of students were assessed using the Rate Reaction Argumentation Test (r = 0.894). Data analysis techniques included the One-way ANOVA test and N-gain analysis. Consequently, the results showed that (1) students taught with MLS-PDCA SSI greatly improved in scientific argumentation skills compared to those in MLS-PDCA and ELS classes. (2) MLS-PDCA SSI proved to be an effective learning strategy for improving scientific argumentation skills, especially in the context of daily life-related learning materials. Conclusively, the development of scientific explanatory skills through metacognitive learning strategies contributed to the development of scientific argumentation quality.