Assessing Metacognition
Research indicates metacognition is strongly linked to learning. Better developed metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive control, and reflection are indicators of expert learners (Bransford et al., 2000), while lesser metacognitive processes are linked with lower-achieving students. (Campione, 1984; Chi et. el., 1989) Students must be able to compare their understanding to what they already know, fit the concepts they learn to a big picture and reflect on their learning (NRC (National Resource Council), 2005; Weinstein, Meyer, Husman, Van Mater, & McKeachie, 2006). Recent research indicates that many students lack the skills needed to be successful in the workforce, including critical thinking and self-monitoring skills (Partnership for the
…show more content…
For example, metacognition is not directly observable in students (Sperling et al., 2002). First, Whitebread et al. (2009) argue that self-report methods, such as the use of rating scales or questionnaires that ask respondents to describe their use of particular strategies, rely too heavily on verbal ability. In addition, techniques that ask respondents to “think aloud” while engaging in a task do not capture implicit cognitive processes. In other words, subjects may not be aware of their cognitive knowledge and monitoring, which suggests that think-aloud methods may underestimate an individual’s metacognitive capacity. Moreover, these problems are compounded in preschooland elementary-aged children, whose verbal ability and working memory capacities are incompletely developed. Thus, self-report and think-aloud techniques may be especially likely to underestimate the metacognitive abilities of young children. Finally, metacognition is a complex construct, involving cognitive knowledge and cognitive regulation. Moreover, there are multiple types of cognitive knowledge (declarative, procedural, conditional) as well as different types of cognitive regulation (planning, monitoring or regulating, and evaluating). Metacognition also entails affective and motivational states, including concepts such as effortful control and inhibitory control. Schraw and Moshman (1995) note that such complexity makes unreliability an
For example, metacognition is not directly observable in students (Sperling et al., 2002). First, Whitebread et al. (2009) argue that self-report methods, such as the use of rating scales or questionnaires that ask respondents to describe their use of particular strategies, rely too heavily on verbal ability. In addition, techniques that ask respondents to “think aloud” while engaging in a task do not capture implicit cognitive processes. In other words, subjects may not be aware of their cognitive knowledge and monitoring, which suggests that think-aloud methods may underestimate an individual’s metacognitive capacity. Moreover, these problems are compounded in preschooland elementary-aged children, whose verbal ability and working memory capacities are incompletely developed. Thus, self-report and think-aloud techniques may be especially likely to underestimate the metacognitive abilities of young children. Finally, metacognition is a complex construct, involving cognitive knowledge and cognitive regulation. Moreover, there are multiple types of cognitive knowledge (declarative, procedural, conditional) as well as different types of cognitive regulation (planning, monitoring or regulating, and evaluating). Metacognition also entails affective and motivational states, including concepts such as effortful control and inhibitory control. Schraw and Moshman (1995) note that such complexity makes unreliability an