Abstract
The support of modelling in school is a common issue in investigations and in the relevant literature on modelling competence. In this chapter, research is presented on constructing a test instrument for assessing metacognitive knowledge of modelling. Based on a theoretical definition of the term “metacognitive knowledge” and its domain-specific connection to mathematical modelling, a large number of items were developed. The scalability and possible reduction of items are analysed in this chapter. The process of item construction and evaluation is described in detail. With the help of a one-parameter Rasch analysis, it can be deduced that a selection of items is suitable for measuring at least some aspects of metacognitive knowledge of mathematical modelling.
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
Andersen, E. B. (1973). Conditional inference for multiple-choice questionnaires. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 26, 31–44.
Blum, W., & Leiss, D. (2007). How do students and teachers deal with modelling problems? In C. Haines, P. Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling (ICTMA 12): Education, engineering and economics (pp. 222–231). Chichester, UK: Horwood.
Bolisani, E., & Bratianu, C. (2018). The elusive definition of knowledge. In Emergent knowledge strategies (Vol. 4, pp. 1–22). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60657-6_1.
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Boone, W. J. (2016). Rasch Analysis for instrument development: Why, when, and how? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4), rm4. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-04-0148.
Cohors-Fresenborg, E., Kramer, S., Pundsack, F., Sjuts, J., & Sommer, N. (2010). The role of metacognitive monitoring in explaining differences in mathematics achievement. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 42, 231–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0237-x.
English, L. D., Ärlebäck, J. B., & Mousoulides, N. (2016). Reflections on progress in mathematical modelling research. In Á. Gutiérrez, G. C. Leder, & P. Boero (Eds.), The second handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: The journey continues (pp. 383–413). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral communication skills (pp. 35–60). New York: Academic Press.
Hankeln, C., Adamek, C., & Greefrath, G. (2019). Assessing sub-competencies of mathematical modelling - Development of a new test instrument. In G. A. Stillman & J. P. Brown (Eds.), Lines of inquiry in mathematical modelling research in education (pp. 143–160). Cham: Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14931-4.
Kaiser, G. (2007). Modelling and modelling competencies in school. In C. Haines, P. Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling (ICTMA 12): Education, engineering and economics (pp. 110–119). Chichester, UK: Horwood Publishing.
Klock, H., & Wess, R. (2018). Lehrerkompetenzen zum mathematischen Modellieren. Test zur Erfassung von Aspekten professioneller Kompetenz zum Lehren mathematischen Modellierens. WWU-Publikationsserver MIAMI. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hbz:6-35169679459. Accessed 20 March 2019
Maaß, K. (2007). Modelling in class: What do we want the students to learn? In C. Haines, P. Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling (ICTMA 12): Education, engineering and economics (pp. 63–78). Chichester, UK: Horwood Publishing.
Mislevy, R. J. (2017). On measurement in educational assessment. In C. Secolsky & D. B. Denision (Eds.), Handbook on measurment, assessment, and evaluation in higer education (2nd ed., pp. 11–32). London: Routledge.
Molina-Toro, J., Rendón-Mesa, P., & Villa-Ochoa, J. (2019). Research trends in digital technologies and modeling in mathematics education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(8). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108438.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G.H. Bower (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125–173). New York: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5.
OECD. (2012). PISA 2009 technical report. Paris: OECD.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & Mckeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Nielsen and Lydiche.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What’s all the fuss about metacognition? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189–215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schukajlow, S., Kolter, J., & Blum, W. (2015). Scaffolding mathematical modelling with a solution plan. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 47(7), 1241–1254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0707-2.
Scott, B. M., & Levy, M. (2013). Metacognition: examining the components of a fuzzy concept. Educational Research Journal, 2(2), 120–131. https://doi.org/10.5838/erej.2013.22.04.
Stillman, G. (2004). Strategies employed by upper secondary students for overcoming or exploiting conditions affecting accessibility of applications tasks. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 16(1), 41–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217390.
Stillman, G. A., & Galbraith, P. L. (1998). Applying mathematics with real world connections: Metacognitive characteristics of secondary students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 36, 157–189.
Tanner, H., & Jones, S. (1995). Developing metacognitive skills in mathematical modelling: A Socio-constructivist interpretation. In C. Sloyer, W. Blum, & I. Huntley (Eds.), Advances and perspectives in the teaching of mathematical modelling and applications (pp. 61–70). Yorklyn: Water Street Mathematics.
Veenman, M. V. J. (2007). The assessment and instruction of self-regulation in computer-based environments: A discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2–3), 177–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-007-9017-6.
Vorhölter, K. (2018). Conceptualization and measuring of metacognitive modelling competencies: Empirical verification of theoretical assumptions. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 50(1-2), 343–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0909-x.
Vorhölter, K., Krüger, A., & Wendt, L. (2019). Metacognition in mathematical modeling—An overview. In S. A. Chamberlin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Affect in mathematical modeling (pp. 29-51). Cham: Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04432-9.
Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., Wilson, M. R., & Haldane, S. A. (2007). ACER ConQuest version 2.0: Generalised item response modelling software. ACER Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Frenken, L. (2021). Measuring Students’ Metacognitive Knowledge of Mathematical Modelling. In: Leung, F.K.S., Stillman, G.A., Kaiser, G., Wong, K.L. (eds) Mathematical Modelling Education in East and West. International Perspectives on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematical Modelling. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66996-6_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66996-6_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-66995-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-66996-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)