Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning Constructs

Sperling, Rayne A.; Howard, Bruce C.; Staley, Richard K.; DuBois, Nelson F.

doi:10.1076/edre.10.2.117.27905

Cited by 254 publications

(207 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

164

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Ford et al (1998) reported that students with learning goal orientation where more likely to be metacognitively self-regulated. In contrast, Sperling, Howard, Staley, and DuBois, (2004) reported that intrinsic motivation was not related to the engagement in metacognitive activities. We argue that understanding students' learning probably requires consideration of the effects of students' metacognitive self-regulation skills, in addition to the motivational variables.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Goals, Efficacy and Metacognitive Self-Regulation A Path Analysis

Al-Harthy¹,

Was²,

Isaacson³

2010

IJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to illustrate the relationship between self-efficacy, task value, goal orientations, metacognitive self-regulation, self-regulation and learning strategies and to investigate the unique contribution of each on the variability in students' total scores of 12 exams. Our study revealed that students' self-efficacy, task-value, self-regulation, and elaboration are significantly positively correlated with total scores. Path analysis demonstrated that self-efficacy was the strongest predictor of total score and positively predicted mastery goals, but negatively predicted avoidant goals. The study reveals positive direct effect of mastery goals on metacognitive self-regulation. In addition, positive direct effects of metacognitive self-regulation on deep learning strategies and on self-regulatory strategies are found. However, some expected direct effects were not represented with significant parameters in the model. Performance-approach goals were not a significant predictor of other variables in the model. Also, there were no significant direct effects of mastery goals nor metacognitive self-regulation and deep learning strategies on total scores which were discussed here.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Goals, Efficacy and Metacognitive Self-Regulation A Path Analysis

Al-Harthy¹,

Was²,

Isaacson³

2010

IJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Metacognition refers to thinking about and regulating one's own cognition. It is a construct that has been linked to effective learning and higher academic achievement presumably because it enables students to evaluate and effectively control their own learning (Young & Fry, 2008;Schraw, 1994;Sperling, Howard, & Staley, 2004). There is evidence that college students with higher metacognitive knowledge and skills are more likely to perform better in measures of academic performance than peers with low metacognition (Steinberg, Bohning, & Chowning, 1991;Maki, 1998a;Commander & Stanwyck, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of a Metacognitive Intervention on College Students’ Reading Performance and Metacognitive Skills

Amzil¹

2013

JEDP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of the present study was to investigate the impact of a metacognitive intervention, with explicit training in monitoring and control on college students' reading performance and metacognitive skills. The intervention that is five sessions long, used an instructional design that combines reflective dialogue, modeling, and group-practice. Effects were contrasted with an active control group who received strategy training in reading comprehension. Results showed that the experimental group gained in metacognitive skills and reading performance while the control group did not show any change from pretest to posttest. Finally, we found that within the experimental group high achievers as measured by GPA showed greater gains in reading than low achievers.

show abstract

“…As we investigated students' movement through the three domains of metacognitive awareness (Schraw, 1998;Schraw & Dennison, 1994;Sperling, Howard, Staley, & DuBois, 2004), students became aware of important writing skills and strategies and started to become aware of how to apply those skills and strategies. However, they did not reach an awareness of when and why to apply writing skills and strategies.…”

Section: Conclusion Recommendations and Implications Metacognitive Wmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As students' metacognitive awareness shifts, they tend to "take more initiative in writing and to self-regulate their writing by developing a personal writing process" (p. 171). Metacognitive awareness has three domains: declarative knowledge (awareness of strategies), procedural knowledge (awareness of how to apply strategies), and conditional knowledge (awareness of when and why to apply strategies; Schraw, 1998;Schraw & Dennison, 1994;Sperling, Howard, Staley, & DuBois, 2004). Therefore, metacognitive writing may also lead to awareness of three domains of metacognition in a given context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Journal of Applied Communications, 2017, vol. 101, no. 1 Full Issue

Ellis¹

2017

Journal of Applied Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning Constructs

Cited by 254 publications

References 54 publications

Goals, Efficacy and Metacognitive Self-Regulation A Path Analysis

Goals, Efficacy and Metacognitive Self-Regulation A Path Analysis

The Effect of a Metacognitive Intervention on College Students’ Reading Performance and Metacognitive Skills

Journal of Applied Communications, 2017, vol. 101, no. 1 Full Issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About