Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Examining Intentional Knowing Among Secondary School Students: Through the Lens of Metacognition

  • Published:
The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we examine intentional knowing through the lens of metacognition. Learners are not just active in their construction of meaning, but they can also be intentional. This would mean that they are cognitively engaged in the learning process, monitoring and regulating their learning. To learn intentionally, students must consciously understand and be able to define their strengths and weaknesses, their learning processes, how they examine the way they execute learning tasks, monitor learning, evaluate learning, and whether they innovate in order to learn intentionally. The two main purposes of this study are to examine whether the IKIS (revised MAI) is able to provide a six-factor solution to explain intentional knowing and to predict the influences of age and intellectual ability on students’ intentional knowing. This study involved 732 secondary school students, and several statistical analyses such as exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were performed. A six-factor solution was generated and the implications of this study are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allon, M., Gutkin, T. B., & Bruning, R. (1994). The relation between metacognition and intelligence in normal adolescents: Some tentative but surprising findings. Psychology in the Schools, 31, 93–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artelt, C., Baumert, J., Julius-McElvany, N., & Peschar, J. (2003). Das Lernen lernen. Voraussetzungen für lebensbegleitendes Lernen. Ergebnisse von PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.

  • Baker, L., & Cerro, L. C. (2000). Assessing metacognition in children and adults. In G. Schraw & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 99–146). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

  • Baumert, J. (1993). Lernstrategien, motivationale Orientierungen und Selbstwirksamkeitsüberzeugungen im Kontext schulischen Lernens. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 21, 327–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert, J., & Köller, O. (1996). Lernstrategien und schulische Leistungen. In J. Möller & O. Köller (Eds.), Emotionen, Kognitionen und Schulleistung (pp. 137–154). Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 361–392). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berk, L. E. (2003). Child Development. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), The theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 453–479). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, P. (1993). Metacognition ang giftedness: The state of the relationship. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 105–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choy, S. C., & Cheah, P. K. (2009). Teacher perceptions of critical thinking among students and its influence on higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(2), 198–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist, 13(4), 277–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring A new era of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H., Miller, P. H., & Miller, S. A. (2002). Cognitive development. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frensch, P. A. (1998). One concept, multiple meanings. In M. A. Stadler & P. A. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. E, Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannah, C. L., & Shore, B. M. (1995). Metacogniton and high intellectual ability: Insights from the study of learning-disabled gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 95–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, M. G. (2003). Metacognitive aspects of students’ reflective discourse: Implications for intentional conceptual teaching and learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 103–132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). Incidental and intentional learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition. Blackwell Publishing, 2005: Blackwell Reference Online. 3 Oct 2012.

  • Jones, M. E., Antonenko, P. D., & Greenwood, C. M. (2012). The impact of collaborative and individualized student response system strategies on learner motivation, metacognition, and knowledge transfer. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5), 477–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 233–265). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkhart, M. W. (2001). The nature of declarative and nondeclarative knowledge for implicit and explicit learning. Journal of General Psychology, 128(4), 447–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (1999). Metacognitive development. In L. Balter & C. S. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), Child psychology: A handbook of contemporary issues (pp. 259–286). Ann Arbor, MI: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D., & Dean, D. (2004). Metacognition: A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory into Practice, 43(4), 268–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. B., & Teo, T. (2011). Shifting pre-service teachers’ metacognition through problem solving. The Asia-Pacific Educational Researcher, 20(3), 570–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. B., Teo, T., & Chai, C. S. (2010). Profiling pre-service teachers’ awareness and regulation of their own thinking: Evidence from an Asian country. Teacher Development, 14(3), 296–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, P. L., Chen, C. J., & Chang, Y. J. (2010). Effects of a computer-assisted concept mapping learning strategy on EFL college students’ English reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 54(2), 436–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magno, C. (2010). The role of metacognitive skills in developing critical thinking. Metacognition Learning, 5, 137–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, C. (2011). Using technology for enhancing reflective writing, metacognition and learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 36(2), 147–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26, 49–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLain, K. V. M., Gridley, B. E., & McIntosh, D. (1991). Value of a scale used to measure metacognitive reading processes. Journal of Educational Research, 85, 81–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muis, K. R., Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2007). Using a multitrait-multimethod analysis to examine conceptual similarities of three self-regulated learning inventories. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 177–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S. C., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36, 89–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research ti Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.

  • Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self regulated learning. In G. Schraw (Ed.), Metacognitive assessment. Lincoln, NE: The University of Nebraska Press.

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building. In Encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., pp. 1370–1373). New York, NY: Macmillan.

  • Schiefele, U. (2005). Prüfungsnahe Erfassung von Lernstrategien und deren Vorhersagewert für nachfolgende Lernleistungen. In C. Artelt, & B. Moschner (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition. Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis (pp. 13–41). Münster: Waxmann.

  • Schiefele, U., Streblow, L., Ermgassen, U., & Moschner, B. (2003). Lernmotivation und Lernstrategien als Bedingungen der Studienleistung. Ergebnisse einer Längsschnittstudie. Zeitschrift fur Padagogische Psychologie, 17(3/4), 185–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W., & Kurschner, C. (2007). A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 469–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (2009). A conceptual analysis of five measures of metacognitive monitoring. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 33–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 351–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigler, E. A., & Tallent-Runnels, M. K. (2006). Examining the validity of scores from an instrument designed to measure metacogniton of problem solving. The Journal of Educational Psychology, 133(3), 257–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G. M. (2000). From passive to active to intentional: Changing conceptions of the learner. In G. M. Sinatra (Chair), What does it mean to be an intentional learner? Alternative perspectives. Symposium presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA.

  • Sinatra, G. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of intentions in conceptual learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 1–18). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Intentional conceptual change: The self-regulation of science learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 203–214). UK: Routledge.

  • Sinatra, G. M., Brem, S. K., & Evans, E. M. (2008). Changing minds? Implications of conceptual change for teaching and learning about biological evolution. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 1(2), 189–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Henessey, M. G. (2000). Sixth-grade students’ epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), 349–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Miller, L. A., & Murphy, C. (2002). Measures of children’s knowledge and regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 51–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperling, R., Richmond, A., Ramsay, C., & Klapp, M. (2012). The measurement and predictive ability of metacognition in middle school learners. Journal of Educational Research, 105, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, P. W., Cooper, S. S., & Moulding, L. R. (2007). Metacognitive development in professional educators. The Researcher, 21(1), 32–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sungur, A., & Senler, B. (2009). An analysis of Turkish high school students’ metacognition and motivation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(1), 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobias, S., & Everson, H. T. (2000). Cognition and metacognition. Educational Issues, 6, 167–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobias, S., & Everson, H. T. (2002). Knowing what you know and what you don’t: further research on metacoignitive knowledge monitoring (College Board Rep Rep. No. 2002-03). New York: College Board.

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Kok, R., & Blote, A. W. (2005). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills in early adolescence. Instructional Science, 33, 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 159–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, C. E., Palmer, D. R., & Schultre, a C. (1987). LASSI: Learning and study strategies inventory. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A. (2006). The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of teaching higher order thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 331–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A., & David, A. B. (2009). Paving a clear path in a thick forest: A conceptual analysis of a metacognitive component. Metacognition Learning, 4, 177–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia

    Chwee Beng Lee

Authors
  1. Chwee Beng Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chwee Beng Lee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, C.B. Examining Intentional Knowing Among Secondary School Students: Through the Lens of Metacognition. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 22, 79–90 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-012-0028-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-012-0028-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation