The Development and Inter‐relationship of Metacognitive Components among Primary School Children

Abstract

Much interest has been expressed in the construct metacognition, the individual's knowledge and control of his own cognitive processes. Recent educational proposals have suggested the training of general metacognitive principles in schools. The exact nature of the construct has, however, remained vague. The aim of the present study was to provide some clarity. In a study of the metacognitive responses of 144 primary school children (aged 7-11 years) four measures commonly used to assess metacognitive function were examined. First, the content of each measure was examined. Secondly, in an attempt to identify a metacognitive factor, commonality among the measures, both of developmental patterns and statistical relationship, was sought. Whilst a common pattern of development in the children's responses to the four measures was identified, factor analysis failed to provide evidence for a common metacognitive factor and unified construct.In the last 15 years much interest has centred on the concept of metacognition: the individual's knowledge of cognition and regulation of his own cognitive processes. Metacognition has been the focus of research, particularly for developmentalist and, more recently, for its educational relevance (Feuerstein et al, 1980; Nisbett & Shucksmith, 1986;Sternberg, 1989). It has been suggested that identification of children's knowledge of their own memory functioning and its limitations might form the basis for teaching. Children's learning might be enhanced by training in broad metacognition skills and strategies whilst teachers might harmonise their teaching with the strengths and limitations of their pupils. Despite the interest accorded metacognition and a number of research reviews which have called for greater clarity, however 5 Downloaded by [Computing & Library Services, University of Huddersfield] at 23:36 26 December 2014 6 K. J. Thorpe & D. J. H. Satterly( Brown et al., 1983;Wellman, 1983;Schneider, 1985), metacognition remains "a fuzzy concept" (Wellman, 1983).The range of tasks in which metacognitive differences have been observed is diverse. The present paper seeks to provide some clarity. Its aim is to identify the essence of the concept as it is used in the literature by examining the measures commonly used to access it. First, it examines the nature of individual measures of metacognition. Secondly, it examines the relationship between measures in an endeavour to identify those points of commonality which might be identified as metacognitive factor. Measures of MetacognitionCurrent measures of metacognition are largely derived from studies whose aim is to describe its development. These studies have typically observed, cross-sectionally, children's responses to specific individual cognitive tasks (learning, problem-solving) from which a metacognitive component is derived. This metacognitive component is not so much the outcome of the task (how much is learned or the solution of the problem) but rather the principles applied (metacognitive knowledge) and the conscious contr...

Fifth graders metacognitive knowledge: general or domain-specific?

“…With respect to achievement in reading and mathematics, the explanatory power of domainspecific metacognitive knowledge turned out to be higher than the explanatory power of general metacognitive knowledge or cognitive ability. Our results about the structure of metacognitive knowledge are in accordance with theoretical assumptions on the domain specificity of metacognitive knowledge (Thorpe and Satterly 1990). The item-based analysis of dimensionality for the metacognitive knowledge items in the domain of reading and mathematics indicates a superior representation of a twodimensional model as compared to a one-dimensional model indicating the distinctiveness of metacognitive knowledge in the two specific domains.…”

Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations

“…We endorse further research into the intricate relations between Theory of Mind, metamemory, metacognitive experiences and awareness, metacognitive knowledge, and metacognitive skills (cf. Thorpe & Satterly, 1990). We view this state of affairs as healthy and inevitable, with the dynamic evolution of scientific knowledge fueled by diverse, related traditions of research inquiry.…”

“…Thorpe & Satterly, 1990). Moreover, we need to know how the development of a metacognitive component contributes to the subsequent development of other ones.…”

The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children

“…To begin with, of course, such measures rely upon a level of verbal understanding and fluency which cannot necessarily be assumed in young children. As regards think alouds, while this procedure has clearly much to offer with adults and older children, with young children their lack of verbal proficiency is likely to lead to working memory overload, resulting in either incomplete protocols or interference and distortion of their performance on the task (Garner 1988; Thorpe & Satterly 1990). A second difficulty with verbal self-report data concerns the extent to which individuals are capable, in any case, however verbally fluent, to report upon their own mental processes.…”