Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The assessment of meta-cognition in different contexts: individualized vs. peer assisted learning

  • Published:
Metacognition and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated the effectiveness of assessing young children’s meta-cognition in different contexts (i.e., individual learning (IL), peer assisted learning (PAL) and self-reports). Additionally, the contributions of declarative and procedural meta-cognition in IL and PAL, TOM and language ability on children’s cognitive performance (recalling a series of pictures) were examined. Sixty-four 4–5-year-old children (M = 5.14; SD = 0.72), randomly selected from two Israeli kindergartens, participated in the study. Children were first asked in an individualized setting to recall a series of nine pictures; they were then asked (self-report) to tell the interviewer how they tried to recall the pictures. Finally, they were asked to assist a peer in recalling the pictures in a PAL situation. All the children’s verbal and non-verbal behaviors were coded and analyzed. In addition, the children’s language ability and Theory of Mind (TOM) were assessed. The findings indicated significant differences between children’s declarative (self-report) and procedural meta-cognitive behavior in IL and PAL. Procedural meta-cognition in PAL and TOM predicted cognitive performance even when procedural meta-cognition in IL, declarative meta-cognition and language ability were controlled for. The findings are discussed in light of recent research on meta-cognition in young children.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Astington, J. W., & Jenkins, J. M. (1999). A longitudinal study of the relation between language and theory-of-mind development. Developmental Psychology, 35, 1311–1320. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.35.5.1311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornoldi, C., Gobbo, C., & Mazzoni, G. (1991). On meta-memory-memory relationship: strategy availability and training. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 14, 101–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, C. (1998). Children as computer users: the case of collaborative learning. Computers and Education, 30, 237–247. doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(97)00067-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1999). Cognitive development: children’s knowledge about mind. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 21–45. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (2000). Development of children’s knowledge about the mental world. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 24, 15–23. doi:10.1080/016502500383421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (2004). Theory of mind development: retrospect and prospect. Journal of Developmental Psychology, 50(3), 274–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H., Beach, D. R., & Chinsky, J. M. (1966). Spontaneous verbal rehearsal in a memory task as a function of age. Child Development, 37, 283–299. doi:10.2307/1126804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H., Flavell, E. R., & Green, F. L. (1983). Development of the appearance–reality distinction. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 95–120. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(83)90005-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H., Miller, P. H., & Miller, S. A. (1993). Cognitive development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlet, C., & Karns, K. (1998). High achieving students’ interaction and performance on complex mathematical task as a function of homogeneous and heterogeneous pairing. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 227–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopnik, A., & Astington, J. W. (1988). Children’s understanding of representational change and its relation to the understanding of false belief and the appearance–reality distinction. Child Development, 59, 26–37. doi:10.2307/1130386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, B. W., & Griffin, M. M. (1997). The effect of reciprocal peer tutoring on graduate student’s achievement, test anxiety and academic self-efficacy. Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 197–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karpov, Y. V., & Haywood, H. C. (1998). Two ways to elaborate Vygotsky’s concept of mediation: Implications for instruction. The American Psychologist, 53, 27–36. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.53.1.27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (1983). The Kaufman assessment battery for children. Circle Pine, NM: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1997). Ask to think tell why: a model of transactive peer tutoring for scaffolding higher level complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 32, 221–235. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3204_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: effects of cooperative learning and meta-cognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 239–280. doi:10.3102/00028312040001281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreutzer, M. A., Leonard, C., & Flavell, J. H. (1975). An interview study of children’s knowledge about memory. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 40 (Serial No.159).

  • Light, P. H., & Mevarech, Z. R. (1992). Cooperative learning with computers: an introduction. Learning and Instruction, 2, 155–159. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(92)90006-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockl, K., & Schneider, W. (2006). Precursors of meta-memory in young children: the role of theory of mind and meta-cognitive vocabulary. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 15–31. doi:10.1007/s11409-006-6585-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockl, K., & Schneider, W. (2007). Knowledge about the mind: links between theory of mind and later meta-memory. Child Development, 78, 148–167. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00990.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R. (1991). Learning with computers in small groups: cognitive and affective outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7, 233–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R. (1999). Effects of meta-cognitive training embedded in cooperative settings on mathematical problem solving. The Journal of Educational Research, 92, 195–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). IMPROVE: a multidimensional method for teaching mathematics in heterogeneous classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 365–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1996). Consciousness and meta-cognition. The American Psychologist, 51, 102–116. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Meta-memory: a theoretical framework and new findings. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (vol. 26, pp. 125–140). New York: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A. M., & King, A. (Eds.) (1999). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Perner, J. (1991). Understanding the representational mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W. (2005). Meta-cognition in young children: evidence from a naturalistic study of 3-5-year-olds. Paper presented at 11th EARLI International Conference, University of Nicosia, Cyprus.

  • Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (1997). Memory development between 2 and 20. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., & Sodian, B. (1988). Meta-memory–memory behavior relationships in young children: Evidence from a memory-for-location task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 45, 209–233. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(88)90030-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing meta-cognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460–475. doi:10.1006/ceps.1994.1033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, A., & Lazerovitz, T. (2007). Peer mediation intervention for scaffolding self-regulated learning among children with learning disabilities. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22, 255–273. doi:10.1080/08856250701430786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, A., Tzuriel, D., & Rosen, M. (2006). Peer mediation: the effects of program intervention, math level, and verbal ability on mediation style and improvement in math problem solving. School Psychology International, 27, 209–231. doi:10.1177/0143034306064548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, A., Tzuriel, D., & Guy, R. (2007). Computer-supported collaborative learning: cognitive effects of a peer mediation intervention. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 6, 373–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, A., Korat, O., & Barbi, N. (2008). The effects of CD-ROM storybook reading on low SES kindergarteners’ emergent literacy as a function of activity context: Paired peer tutoring versus individual use of the e-storybook. Computers & Education, 51, 354–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1978). Student’s team and achievement division. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12, 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, K., Zaitchik, D., & Tager-Flusberg, H. (1994). Preschoolers can attribute second order beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 30, 395–402. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.30.3.395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K., & Ehly, S. (1998). Introduction to peer-assisted learning. In K. Topping, & S. Ehly (Eds.), Peer-assisted learning (pp. 1–23). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tudge, R. H. (1996). The cognitive consequences of collaborative problem solving with and without feedback. Child Development, 67, 2892–2909. doi:10.2307/1131758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utay, C., & Utay, J. (1997). Peer assisted learning; the effects of cooperative learning and cross age peer tutoring with word processing on writing skills of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 8, 165–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of meta-cognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs? In C. Artelt, & B. Moschner (Eds.), Lernstrategien und metakognition: Implikationen für forschung und praxis (pp. 77–99). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J. (2007). The assessment and instruction of self-regulation in computer-based environments: a discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 177–183. doi:10.1007/s11409-007-9017-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3–14. doi:10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitebread, D., Anderson, H., Coltman, P., Page, C., Pino Pasternak, D., & Mehta, S. (2005). Developing independent learning in the early years. Education, 3(13), 40–50, 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitebread, D., Bingham, S., Grau, V., Pino Pasternak, D., & Sangster, C. (2007). Development of meta-cognition and self-regulated learning in young children: role of collaborative and peer-assisted learning. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 3, 433–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer, H., & Hartl, M. (1991). Against the Cartesian view on mind: young children’s difficulty with own false beliefs. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9, 125–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Belief about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In P. Pintrich, M. Boekaerts, & M. Zeidner (Eds.),Handbook of self-regulation. Orlando, FL: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 52900, Israel

    Adina Shamir, Zemira R. Mevarech & Carmit Gida

Authors
  1. Adina Shamir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zemira R. Mevarech
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carmit Gida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adina Shamir.

Appendix

Appendix

Examples of Children’s Declarative Meta-cognition in IL, PAL and TOM

  1. Example 1:

    Children’s Declarative Meta-cognition (Self-reports)

    Question: “What did you do in order to remember?

    I said the picture lots of times. (Repetition).

    I put them together frog and cat (in two’s) and tried to remember.

    I thought about it hard; I used my head to see what I remember.

    I don’t know I just remembered.

  2. Example 2:

    Children’s Procedural meta-cognition (IL)

    The child organizes the cards on the table and looks at them, saying: “I have to see all of them, to remember.”

    The child says again and again the name of each picture (“a table, a table, a table…”) (rehearsal/repetition).

    The child organizes the cards into two’s and says “a table and a chair” (verbal behavior).

    The child organizes the cards in two’s and points to the (non-verbal behavior).

    The child organizes the cards in three’s and says “a cat, a frog, a turtle” (verbal behavior).

    The child puts the cards on opposite sides (in two’s or three’s) and checks if he remembers (non-verbal behavior).

    The child looks at one of the three cards he put on one sides and checks if he remembers the rest, saying: “Ah, this is the third one… (verbal behavior).

    The child checks the cards and says: “This I remembered this I didn’t” (verbal behavior).

  3. Example 3:

    Procedural meta-cognition (PAL)

    “Look, look at the pictures; you have to remember the pictures.”

    “No, start first with the animals.”

    “You can put them together, frog and cat, in two’s.”

    “Put them together—trousers, shirt and jacket—in three’s.”

    “Put it like this (a cat and a turtle) and see if you remember.”

    “Try to remember; you should say the names of the animals aloud again and again, many times.”

    The tutor points to three pictures and says: “One, two, three.”

    “Check if you remember, look and see if you remember a cat.”

    “Put the cards in opposite side and see if you remember the clothing.”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shamir, A., Mevarech, Z.R. & Gida, C. The assessment of meta-cognition in different contexts: individualized vs. peer assisted learning. Metacognition Learning 4, 47–61 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9032-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9032-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation