Abstract
The aim of this chapter is to present new assessment methods for different aspects of metacognition that are relevant for self-regulated learning (SRL). In the theoretical part, two assumptions on the assessment of different aspects of metacognition are presented. Firstly, we argue that metacognitive knowledge about strategies and metacognitive regulation of strategies are two distinct components of metacognition that make different demands on their respective assessment method. Secondly, we argue that metacognitive knowledge about and metacognitive regulation of strategy use should be assessed with regard to the same strategies, in order to be able to relate both measures and to localize specific deficiencies. In the methods part, the theoretically driven development of two computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) for scientific discovery learning is presented. Based on these, two kinds of assessment methods are presented, a test format that intends to assess metacognitive knowledge about scientific discovery strategies and logfile-based measures that intend to assess metacognitive regulation of the use of these strategies during SRL with the CBLEs. In the empirical part, three studies are presented that investigated the test quality of these new assessment methods as well as the relationship between metacognitive knowledge about and metacognitive regulation of the same strategy. In sum, results speak in favor of a good test quality of the new assessment methods. Based on this, results revealed that the relationship between metacognitive knowledge about and metacognitive regulation of the actual use of the same strategy is moderated by current motivation. Finally, results are discussed with respect to the development of further instruments as well as with respect to approaches of SRL support.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Artelt, C., Demmrich, A., & Baumert, J. (2001). Selbstreguliertes Lernen. [Self-regulated learning.]. In J. Baumert, E. Klieme, M. Neubrand, M. Prenzel, U. Schiefele, W. Schneider, P. Stanat, K.-J. Tillmann, & M. Weiß (Eds.), PISA 2000. Basiskompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich [PISA 2000. School students’ basic competencies in the international comparison] (pp. 271–298). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.
Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344–370.
Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Johnson, A. M., & Chauncey, A. D. (2010). Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory processes during hypermedia learning: Issues and challenges. Educational Psychologist, 45, 210–223.
Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2008). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the verbalisation method affect learning? Metacognition & Learning, 3, 39–58.
Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: a new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7, 161–186.
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chi, M. T. H., De Leeuw, N., Chiu, M.-H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.
Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2006). Self-report of reading comprehension strategies: What are we measuring? Metacognition & Learning, 1, 229–247.
Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 91–142.
De Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68, 179–201.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.
Greene, J. A., Muis, K. R., & Pieschl, S. (2010). The role of epistemic beliefs in students’ self-regulated learning with computer-based learning environments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Educational Psychologist, 45, 245–257.
Hadwin, A. F., Nesbit, J. C., Code, J., Jamieson-Noel, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (2007). Examining trace data to explore self-regulated learning. Metacognition & Learning, 2, 107–124.
Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1–48.
Körkel, J., & Schneider, W. (1992). Domain-specific versus metacognitive knowledge effects on text recall and comprehension. In M. Carretero, M. Pope, R.-J. Simons, & J. I. Pozo (Eds.), Learning and instruction—European research in an international context (pp. 311–323). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kuhn, D., Black, J., Keselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 495–523.
Njoo, M., & De Jong, T. (1993). Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for control theory: Learning processes and instructional support. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 821–844.
Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychologist, 8, 293–316.
Perry, N. E., & Winne, P. H. (2006). Learning from learning kits: gStudy traces of students’ self-regulated engagements with computerized content. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 211–228.
Pressley, M. (1995). What is intellectual development about in the 1990s? Good information processing. In F. E. Weinert & W. Schneider (Eds.), Memory performance competencies. Issues in growth and development (pp. 375–404). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., & Schneider, W. (1987). Cognitive strategies: Good strategy users coordinate metacognition and knowledge. In R. Vasta & G. Whilehurst (Eds.), Annals of child development (Vol. 4, pp. 80–129). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Ramm, G., Prenzel, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Lehmann, R., & Leutner, D. (Eds.). (2006). PISA 2003: Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente. [PISA 2003: Documentation of the assessment instruments]. Münster: Waxmann.
Rheinberg, R., Vollmeyer, R., & Burns, B.D. (2001). FAM: Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung aktueller Motivation in Lern- und Leistungssituationen [QCM: A questionnaire to assess current motivation in learning situations]. Diagnostica, 47, 57–66.
Schlagmüller, M., & Schneider, W. (2007). Würzburger Lesestrategiewissenstest für die Klassen 7-12 (WLST 7-12). [Wuerzburger reading strategy knowledge test for classes 7-12]. In M. Hasselhorn, H. Marx, & W. Schneider (Eds.), Deutsche Schultests. [German school tests]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Schneider, W., Körkel, J., & Weinert, F. E. (1987). The effects of intelligence, self-concept, and attributional style on metamemory and memory behaviour. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 3, 281–299.
Schneider, W., Schlagmüller, M., & Visé, M. (1998). The impact of metamemory and domain-specific knowledge on memory performance. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 13, 91–103.
Spörer, N., & Brunstein, J. C. (2006). Erfassung selbstregulierten Lernens mit Selbstberichtsverfahren [Assessing self-regulated learning with self-report methods]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 20, 147–160.
Thillmann, H., Künsting, J., Wirth, J., & Leutner, D. (2009). Is it merely a question of “what” to prompt or also “when” to prompt? The role of point of presentation time in self-regulated learning. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 23, 105–115.
Van Joolingen, W. R., & de Jong, T. (1993). Exploring a domain with a computer simulation: Traversing variable and relation space with the help of a hypothesis scratchpad. In D. Towne, T. de Jong, & H. Spada (Eds.), Simulation-based experiential learning (pp. 191–206). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs? In B. Moschner & C. Artelt (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis [Learning strategies and metacognition: Implications for research and practice] (pp. 77–99). Berlin: Waxmann.
Veenman, M. V. J., van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition & Learning, 1, 3–14.
Vollmeyer, R., & Rheinberg, F. (2000). Does motivation affect performance via persistence? Learning and Instruction, 10, 293–309.
Wichmann, A., & Leutner, D. (2009). Inquiry learning: Multilevel support with respect to inquiry, explanations and regulation during an inquiry circle. German Journal of Educational Psychology, 23, 117–127.
Winne, P. H. (1996). A metacognitive view of individual differences in self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 327–353.
Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in education theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2002). Exploring students’ calibration of self reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 551–572.
Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531–566). Orlando, FL: Academic.
Wirth, J. (2008). Computer-based tests: Alternatives for test and item design. In J. Hartig, E. Klieme, & D. Leutner (Eds.), Assessment of competencies in educational contexts (pp. 235–252). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Wirth, J., & Leutner, D. (2006). Selbstregulation beim Lernen in interaktiven Lernumgebungen [Self-regulation of learning in interactive learning environments]. In H. Mandl & H. F. Friedrich (Eds.), Handbuch Lernstrategien [Handbook learning strategies] (pp. 172–184). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 189–205.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego: Academic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thillmann, H., Gößling, J., Marschner, J., Wirth, J., Leutner, D. (2013). Metacognitive Knowledge About and Metacognitive Regulation of Strategy Use in Self-Regulated Scientific Discovery Learning: New Methods of Assessment in Computer-Based Learning Environments. In: Azevedo, R., Aleven, V. (eds) International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 28. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5546-3_37
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5546-3_37
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5545-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-5546-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)