Towards efficient measurement of metacognition in mathematical problem solving

被引:0
作者
Annemieke E. Jacobse
Egbert G. Harskamp
机构
[1] GION,
[2] University of Groningen,undefined
来源
Metacognition and Learning | 2012年 / 7卷
关键词
Measurement; Metacognition; Monitoring; Questionnaire; Performance judgments; Mathematics;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Metacognitive monitoring and regulation play an essential role in mathematical problem solving. Therefore, it is important for researchers and practitioners to assess students’ metacognition. One proven valid, but time consuming, method to assess metacognition is by using think-aloud protocols. Although valuable, practical drawbacks of this method necessitate a search for more convenient measurement instruments. Less valid methods that are easy to use are self-report questionnaires on metacognitive activities. In an empirical study in grade five (n = 39), the accuracy of students’ performance judgments and problem visualizations are combined into a new instrument for the assessment of metacognition in word problem solving. The instrument was administered to groups of students. The predictive validity of this instrument in problem solving is compared to a well-known think-aloud measure and a self-report questionnaire. The results first indicate that the questionnaire has no relationship with word problem solving performance, nor the other two instruments. Further analyses show that the new instrument does overlap with the think-aloud measure and both predict problem solving. But, both instruments also have their own unique contribution to predicting word problem solving. The results are discussed and recommendations are made to further complete the practical measurement instrument.
引用
收藏
页码:133 / 149
页数:16
相关论文
共 107 条
[1]  
Azevedo R(2010)Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory processes during hypermedia learning: Issues and challenges Educational Psychologist 45 210-223
[2]  
Moos DC(2008)Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the verbalisation method affect learning? Metacognition and Learning 3 39-58
[3]  
Johnson AM(2010)Using multiple calibration indices in order to capture the complex picture of what affects students' accuracy of feeling of confidence Learning and Instruction 20 372-382
[4]  
Chauncey AD(2002)Exploring the accuracy and predictability of the self-efficacy beliefs of seventh-grade mathematics students Learning and Individual Differences 14 77-90
[5]  
Bannert M(1999)Representation construction, externalised cognition and individual differences Learning and Instruction 9 343-363
[6]  
Mengelkamp C(2011)Measuring strategy use in context with multiple-choice items Metacognition and Learning 6 155-177
[7]  
Boekaerts M(2007)Evaluating and improving the mathematics teaching-learning process through metacognition Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology 5 705-730
[8]  
Rozendaal JS(2008)Multi-method assessment of metacognitive skills in elementary school children: how you test is what you get Metacognition and Learning 3 189-206
[9]  
Chen PP(2009)Metacognitive prediction and evaluation skills and mathematical learning in third-grade students Educational Research and Evaluation 15 435-446
[10]  
Cox R(2001)Metacognition and mathematical problem solving in grade 3 Journal of Learning Disabilities 34 435-264